Publisher Health

Published3 hours agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingImage source, Getty ImagesBy Nomia Iqbal at the hearing & Sam CabralBBC News, Washington DCThe former head of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has said he was “sidelined” over his views on the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic.Dr Robert Redfield was the key witness in a US congressional committee’s first public hearing as it investigates how the coronavirus emerged.He said he was cut out of early discussions on where the virus came from because he suspected a lab leak.Many scientists point out there is no evidence that Covid leaked from a lab.The White House has said there is no consensus across the US government on the virus’s origins.Some studies suggest the virus made the leap from animals to humans in Wuhan, China, possibly at the city’s seafood and wildlife market.The market is near the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a world-leading virus laboratory that conducted research into coronaviruses.Dr Redfield, who led the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention when the outbreak began in 2020, was an early proponent of the lab leak theory.He told the House select subcommittee, formed by the new Republican majority in the US House of Representatives, it was “not scientifically plausible” to him that the virus had natural origins.He claimed he was “sidelined” at the beginning of the pandemic and excluded from meetings as his views were not in line with other major scientists like Dr Anthony Fauci, the de-facto face of the US pandemic response.”It was told to me that they wanted a single narrative, and that I obviously had a different point of view,” he said. “Science has debate and they squashed any debate.”Dr Redfield also spoke of his opposition to so-called gain of function research, in which viruses are manipulated to become more infectious in lab environments. He said that US agencies had likely funded such research at the Wuhan institute.Divisive subjectThe House panel, which consists of nine Republicans and seven Democrats, has said it aims to stay above the fray of partisan politics.But that may prove difficult given the divisive subject matter.On the panel is Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who used Wednesday’s hearing to air her concerns about decisions made by federal agencies during the pandemic.At the outset of the hearing, Democrat Raul Ruiz protested the inclusion of witness Nicholas Wade, the author of a controversial book on race and genetics that has been endorsed by a former Ku Klux Klan leader.Mr Ruiz argued Mr Wade had written a dangerous book and his testimony could not be relied upon, but Mr Wade defended his book and remained at the hearing.The spectre of Donald Trump also hung over the proceedings, with Democrat Jamie Raskin suggesting the former president had been sycophantic and fawning in his approach to Chinese President Xi Jinping.The House probe comes a week after FBI Director Christopher Wray said an unintentional lab incident was “most likely” how Covid originated.A few days before that, the US Department of Energy said it had found the virus was most likely the result of a lab leak in Wuhan, but could only reach that conclusion with “low confidence”.In response to that, many scientists who have studied the virus said that there was no new scientific evidence pointing to a lab leak.A natural origin is still the more likely theory, said Professor David Robertson, head of viral genomics and bioinformatics at the University of Glasgow.More on this storyCovid origin likely China lab incident – FBI chief1 March

Published5 hours agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingImage source, Getty ImagesBy Pallab GhoshScience correspondentA Japanese researcher has told a major genetics conference that he has created eggs from the cells of male mice.The research, still in its early stages, involved turning male XY sex chromosomes into female XX ones.Prof Katsuhiko Hayashi from Osaka University is working on developing fertility treatments.The development, which he has submitted for publication in the scientific journal Nature, raises the prospect of male couples having their own children.Prof George Daley of Harvard Medical School, who is not involved in the research, said that there was still a long way to go before society was faced with such a decision.”Hayashi’s work is unpublished but fascinating. [Doing this on Humans] is harder than the mouse,” he said. We still don’t understand enough of the unique biology of human gametogenesis (the formation of reproductive cells) to reproduce Hayashi’s provocative work in mice”.Details were presented at the human gene-editing summit at the Crick Institute in London.Prof Hayashi, a globally respected expert in the field, told delegates at the meeting that the work was at a very early stage. The eggs, he said were of low quality and the technique could not be used safely on humans at this stage.But he told BBC News that he could see current problems overcome in ten years and he would like to see it available as a fertility treatment for both male and female and same sex couples if it is proven to be safe to use.”If people want it and if society accepts such a technology then yes, I’m for it”.Image source, BBC NewsThe technique involves first taking a skin cell from a male mouse and then turning it into a stem cell – a cell that can turn into other types of cell.The cells are male and therefore have XY chromosomes. Prof Katsuhiko’s team then delete the Y chromosome, duplicate the X chromosome and then stick the two X’s together. This adjustment allows the stem cell to be programmed to become an egg.The technique could be used to help infertile couples where women are not able to produce their own eggs. He stressed though that it was a long way off from being available as a fertility treatment.”Even in mice there are many problems in the quality of the egg. So before we can think of it as a fertility treatment we have to overcome these problems, which could take a long long time,” he said.Prof Hayashi said he would not be in favour of it being used by a man to create a baby using his own sperm and artificially created eggs.”Technically this is possible. I’m not so sure whether at this stage it is safe or acceptable for society”.Prof Amander Clark, a stem cell scientist from the University of Californa, Los Angeles said that the LBGTQ+ community should have a say in the use of the technology for reproduction.”The LGBTQ+ community have unique needs when it comes to having a family. It may be possible in the future for same-sex reproduction based upon current research using laboratory models to develop the technology. “However, today this technology is not available for human use, safety and efficacy has not been proven, and it is unclear how long the technology will take to get to the clinic. There is still much to learn about the human germ line and fundamental knowledge gaps serve as a barrier to translating this research to humans.”Cultural differencesAlta Charo, professor of law at the University of Wisconsin Maddison, said different cultures would have “profoundly different views” on whether to use the technology, if it became available.”In some societies a genetic contribution to one’s children is considered absolutely essential, and for them it’s a question of ‘is this a step to take?’ for those who are not in a heterosexual arrangement.”For other societies that’s not as nearly as important, and child adoption is perfectly acceptable, because for them families are more about the personal relationship and less about the biological connection.”Prof Haoyi Wang, of the Chinese Academy of Science believes there is a very a long way to go before the technology could be considered for use in the clinic.”Scientists never say never, in principle it has been done in mice so, of course, it may be possible in humans, but I can foresee a lot of challenges and I couldn’t predict how many years that would be.”Follow Pallab on Twitter

New research has found that a natural by-product of olive oil production could potentially have antioxidant benefits and support exercise.
The study, led by nutrition researchers at Anglia Ruskin University (ARU) and published in the journal Nutrients, is the first to examine the benefits of natural olive fruit water for recreationally active people.
Olive fruit water is a waste product derived from producing olive oil. Olives contain polyphenols which have antioxidant properties, and a commercially available olive fruit water product, called OliPhenolia, contains a number of phenolic compounds and is particularly rich in hydroxytyrosol.
The first study into its potential benefits for people who exercise involved 29 recreationally active participants who consumed either OliPhenolia or a placebo, matched for taste and appearance, over 16 consecutive days, and it found positive effects on several key markers of running performance.
OliPhenolia consumption improved respiratory parameters at the onset of exercise as well as oxygen consumption and running economy at lower levels of intensity (lactate threshold 1).
Respiratory parameters at higher intensity (lactate threshold 2) were largely unaffected, but perceived exertion — how hard participants thought their body was working — was improved, as was acute recovery following incremental exercise.
Lead author Dr Justin Roberts, Associate Professor in Health & Exercise Nutrition at Anglia Ruskin University (ARU), said: “For a long time I’ve been interested in the exercise benefits of polyphenols, such as those derived from cherries and beetroot. To gain similar benefits from olives you would have to consume large quantities daily, which isn’t realistic, so we were keen to test this concentrated olive fruit water.
“Like olive oil it contains hydroxytyrosol, but this olive fruit water is a sustainable by-product. It’s typically thrown away during the production of olive oil, and we found a company in Italy — Fattoria La Vialla, a biodynamic farm in Tuscany — who decided to turn this waste water into a dietary supplement.
“Ours is the first study to investigate the use of this olive fruit water in an exercise setting and we found that 16 days of supplementation could have a positive influence on aerobic exercise, most notably at submaximal levels.
“We found that reduced oxygen cost and improved running economy, as well as improvements in acute recovery, indicate it could potentially benefit those who are undertaking regular aerobic exercise training.
“We now intend to carry out further research at Anglia Ruskin University to corroborate these findings. We are also looking to investigate whether this product can be used for marathon training and recovery, as well as test its effectiveness in suppressing inflammation associated with exercise.”
Dr Roberts carried out the work with researchers Jorge Pinto and Joe Lillis. The research was funded by Fattoria La Vialla, Arezzo, Italy. The funders had no role in the design of this peer-reviewed study; in the collection, analysis or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

The nitrate ingested over the course of a person’s adult lifetime through the consumption of tap water and bottled water could be a risk factor for prostate cancer, particularly in the case of aggressive tumours and in younger men. This is the conclusion of a study conducted in Spain and led by the Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal), a centre supported by the “la Caixa” Foundation. The findings have been published in Environmental Health Perspectives.
The study also suggests that diet plays an important role. The researchers found that eating plenty of fibre, fruit/vegetables and vitamin C could reduce the negative effect of nitrate in drinking water.
Ingestion of Waterborne Nitrate and Trihalomethanes
The aim of the study was to assess whether there was an association between the ingestion of waterborne nitrate and trihalomethanes (THMs) and the risk of prostate cancer. Nitrate and THMs are two of the most common contaminants in drinking water. The nitrate present in the water comes from agricultural fertilisers and manure from intensive livestock farming; it is washed into aquifers and rivers by rainfall. “Nitrate is a compound that is a part of nature, but we have altered its natural cycle,” explained Cristina Villanueva, an ISGlobal researcher specialised in water pollution. The new study looked at whether long-term exposure to nitrite throughout adulthood could lead to cancer.
THMs are by-products of water disinfection — i.e. chemical compounds formed after drinking water is disinfected, usually with chlorine. Unlike nitrate, for which the only route of entry is ingestion, THMs can also be inhaled and absorbed through the skin while showering, swimming in pools or washing dishes. Long-term exposure to THMs has been associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer, but evidence of the relationship between THMs and other types of cancer is, to date, very limited.
Prostate Cancer and Long-Term Exposure to Nitrate and THMs in Drinking Water
To evaluate the possible association between prostate cancer and long-term exposure to nitrate and THMs in drinking water, a research team led by ISGlobal studied 697 cases of prostate cancer in Spanish hospitals between 2008 and 2013 (including 97 aggressive tumours), as well as a control group made up of 927 men aged 38-85 years who had not been diagnosed with cancer at the time of the study. The average nitrate and trihalomethanes to which each participant had been exposed since the age of 18 was estimated based on where they had lived and the type (tap water, bottled water or, in some cases, well water) and amount of water they had drunk throughout their lives. Estimates were made on the basis of available data from drinking water controls carried out by municipalities or concessionary companies, from analyses of bottled water of the most widely distributed brands, and from measurements taken in different Spanish locations supplied by groundwater.

The findings showed that the higher the nitrate intake, the greater the association with prostate cancer. Participants with higher waterborne nitrate ingestion (lifetime average of more than 14 mg per day) were 1.6 times more likely to develop low-grade or medium-grade prostate cancer and nearly 3 times more likely to develop an aggressive prostate tumour than participants with lower nitrate intakes (lifetime average of less than 6 mg per day).
“It has been suggested that aggressive prostate cancers, which are associated with a worse prognosis, have different underlying aetiological causes than slow-growing tumours with an indolent course, and our findings confirm this possibility,” explained ISGlobal researcher Carolina Donat-Vargas, lead author of the study. “The risks associated with waterborne nitrate ingestion are already observed in people who consume water with nitrate levels below the maximum level allowed by European directives, which is 50 mg of nitrate per litre of water.”
Drinking Water Does Not Imply Getting Cancer
The authors noted that this study simply provides the first evidence of the association, which will need to be confirmed through further research. Therefore, there is still a long way to go before we can assert a causal relationship. “Being exposed to nitrates through drinking water does not mean that you are going to develop prostate cancer,” commented Donat-Vargas. “Our hope is that this study, and others, will encourage a review of the levels of nitrate that are allowed in water, in order to ensure that there is no risk to human health.”
While the ingestion of waterborne THMs was not associated with prostate cancer, THM concentrations in residential tap water were associated with the development of these tumours, suggesting that inhalation and dermal exposure may play a significant role in total exposure. Further studies properly quantifying exposure to THMs via multiple routes are needed to draw firm conclusions.

Fibre, Fruit, Vegetables and Vitamin C to Prevent Prostate Cancer
Participants also completed a food frequency questionnaire, which provided individual dietary information. A striking finding of the study was that the association between ingested nitrate and prostate cancer were only observed in men with lower intakes of fibre, fruit/vegetables and vitamin C. “Antioxidants, vitamins and polyphenols in fruits and vegetables may inhibit the formation of nitrosamines — compounds with carcinogenic potential — in the stomach,” explained Donat-Vargas. “Moreover, vitamin C has shown significant anti-tumour activity. And fibre, for its part, benefits the intestinal bacteria, which protect against food-derived toxicants, including nitrosamines.” In participants with lower intakes of fibre (≤11 g/day), higher nitrate intake increased the likelihood of prostate cancer by a factor of 2.3. However, in those with higher intakes of fibre ( >11 g/day), higher nitrate intake was not associated with an increased likelihood of prostate cancer.
The research team hopes that this study will help to raise awareness of the potential environmental and human health impacts of pollutants in water, and to persuade authorities to ensure more rigorous control of this natural resource. Among the measures proposed by the authors of the study to reduce nitrate levels are “putting an end to the indiscriminate use of fertilisers and pesticides,” and encouraging the adoption of diets that prioritise the health of the planet by reducing the consumption of animal-based foods, especially meat.
Prostate Cancer: The Most Common Cancer in Spanish Men
Prostate cancer appears to be on the rise worldwide. It is currently the most common cancer in Spanish men, among whom it accounts for 22% of all tumours diagnosed. However, its causes remain largely unknown, and it is one of the few cancers for which the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has not identified a clear carcinogenic agent. The currently recognised risk factors — age, ethnicity and family history — are non-modifiable. However, it is suspected that certain environmental exposures may contribute to the development of prostate cancer, especially in its advanced-stage and more aggressive forms. Therefore, it is vitally important to continue exploring the environmental factors that may contribute to the development of this cancer, so that action can be taken to prevent it.