Intermittent Fasting Plus Early Eating May Prevent Type 2 Diabetes

Individuals at increased risk of type 2 diabetes may be able to reduce their risk via a novel intervention combining intermittent fasting (IF) with early time-restricted eating, indicate the results of a randomized controlled trial.

The study involved more than 200 individuals randomized to one of three groups: eat only in the morning (from 8:00 AM to noon) followed by 20 hours of fasting 3 days per week and eat as desired on the other days; daily calorie restriction to 70% of requirements; or standard weight loss advice.

The IF plus early time-restricted eating intervention was associated with a significant improvement in a key measure of glucose control versus calorie restriction at 6 months, while both interventions were linked to benefits in terms of cardiovascular risk markers and body composition, compared with the standard weight loss advice.

However, the research, published in Nature Medicine, showed that the additional benefit of IF plus early time-restricted eating did not persist, and less than half of participants were still following the plan at 18 months, compared with almost 80% of those in the calorie-restriction group.

"Following a time-restricted, IF diet could help lower the chances of developing type 2 diabetes," said senior author Leonie K. Heilbronn, PhD, University of Adelaide, South Australia, in a press release.

This is "the largest study in the world to date, and the first powered to assess how the body processes and uses glucose after eating a meal," with the latter being a better indicator of diabetes risk than a fasting glucose test, added first author Xiao Tong Teong, a PhD student, also at the University of Adelaide.

"The results of this study add to the growing body of evidence to indicate that meal timing and fasting advice extends the health benefits of a restricted-calorie diet, independently from weight loss, and this may be influential in clinical practice," Teong added.

Adherence Difficult to IF Plus Early Time-Restricted Eating

Asked to comment, Krista Varady, PhD, said that the study design "would have been stronger if the time-restricted eating and IF interventions were separated" and compared.

"Time-restricted eating has been shown to naturally reduce calorie intake by 300-500 kcal/day," she told Medscape Medical News, "so I'm not sure why the investigators chose to combine [it] with IF. It...defeats the point of time-restricted eating."

Varady, who recently coauthored a review of the clinical application of intermittent fasting for weight loss, also doubted whether individuals would adhere to combined early time-restricted eating and IF. "In all honesty, I don't think anyone would follow this diet for very long," she said.

She added that the feasibility of this particular approach is "very questionable. In general, people don't like diets that require them to skip dinner with family/friends on multiple days of the week," explained Varady, professor of nutrition at the University of Illinois, Chicago.  "These regimens make social eating very difficult, which results in high attrition."

"Indeed, evidence from a recent large-scale observational study of nearly 800,000 adults shows that Americans who engage in time-restricted eating placed their eating window in the afternoon or evening," she noted.

Varady therefore suggested that future trials should test "more feasible time-restricted eating approaches," such as those with later eating windows and without "vigilant calorie monitoring."

"These types of diets are much easier to follow and are more likely to produce lasting weight and glycemic control in people with obesity and prediabetes," she observed.

A Novel Way to Cut Calories? 

The Australian authors say there is growing interest in extending the established health benefits of calorie restriction through new approaches such as timing of meals and prolonged fasting, with IF — defined as fasting interspersed with days of ad libitum eating — gaining in popularity as an alternative to simple calorie restriction.

Time-restricted eating, which emphasizes shorter daily eating windows in alignment with circadian rhythms, has also become popular in recent years, although the authors acknowledge that current evidence suggests any benefits over calorie restriction alone in terms of body composition, blood lipids, or glucose parameters are small.

To examine the combination of IF plus early time-restricted eating, in the direct trial, the team recruited individuals aged 35-75 years who had a score of at least 12 on the Australian Type 2 Diabetes Risk Assessment Tool but did not have a diagnosis of diabetes and had stable weight for more than 6 months prior to study entry.

The participants were randomized to one of three groups:IF plus early time-restricted eating, which allowed consumption of 30% of calculated baseline energy requirements between 8:00 AM and midday, followed by a 20-hour fast from midday on 3 nonconsecutive days per week. They consumed their regular diet on nonfasting days.Calorie restriction, where they consumed 70% of daily calculated baseline energy requirements each day and were given rotating menu plans, but no specific mealtimes.Standard care, where they were given a booklet on current guidelines, with no counseling or meal replacement.

There were clinic visits every 2 weeks for the first 6 months of follow-up, and then monthly visits for 12 months. The two intervention groups had one-on-one diet counseling for the first 6 months. All groups were instructed to maintain their usual physical activity levels.

Two hundred and nine individuals were enrolled between September 26, 2018 and May 4, 2020. Their mean age was 58 years, and 57% were women. Mean body mass index (BMI) was 34.8 kg/m².

In all, 40.7% of participants were allocated to IF plus early time-restricted eating, 39.7% to calorie restriction, and the remaining 19.6% to standard care.

The results showed that IF plus early time-restricted eating was associated with a significantly greater improvement in the primary outcome of postprandial glucose area under the curve (AUC) at month 6 compared with calorie restriction, at –10.1 mg/dL/min versus –3.6 mg/dL/min (P = .03).

"To our knowledge, no [prior] studies have been powered for postprandial assessments of glycemia, which are better indicators of diabetes risk than fasting assessment," the authors underline.

IF plus early time-restricted eating was also associated with greater reductions in postprandial insulin AUC versus calorie restriction at 6 months (P = .04). However, the differences between the IF plus early time-restricted eating and calorie restriction groups for postmeal insulin did not remain significant at 18 months of follow-up.

Both IF plus early time-restricted eating and calorie restriction were associated with greater reductions in A1c levels at 6 months versus standard care, but there was no significant difference between the two active interventions (P = .46).

Both interventions were also associated with improvements in markers of cardiovascular risk versus standard care, such as systolic blood pressure at 2 months, diastolic blood pressure at 6 months, and fasting triglycerides at both time points, with no significant differences between the two intervention groups.

IF plus early time-restricted eating and calorie restriction were also both associated with greater reductions in BMI and fat mass in the first 6 months, as well as in waist circumference.

Calorie Restriction Easier to Stick to, Less Likely to Cause Fatigue 

When offered the chance to modify their diet plan at 6 months, 46% of participants in the IF plus early time-restricted eating group said they would maintain 3 days of restrictions per week, while 51% chose to reduce the restrictions to 2 days per week.

In contrast, 97% of those who completed the calorie-restriction plan indicated they would continue with their current diet plan.

At 18 months, 42% of participants in the IF plus early time-restricted eating group said they still undertook 2 to 3 days of restrictions per week, while 78% of those assigned to calorie restriction reported that they followed a calorie-restricted diet.

Fatigue was more common with IF plus early time-restricted eating, reported by 56% of participants versus 37% of those following calorie restriction, and 35% of those in the standard care group at 6 months. Headaches and constipation were more common in the intervention groups than with standard care.

The study was supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council Project Grant, an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship from the University of Adelaide, and a Diabetes Australia Research Program Grant.

No relevant financial relationships were declared.

Nat Med. Published online April 6, 2023. Full text

Parkinson Disease

Parkinson disease (PD) is one of the most common neurologic disorders, affecting approximately 1% of individuals older than 60 years and causing progressive disability that can be slowed, but not halted, by treatment. The 2 major neuropathologic findings in Parkinson disease are loss of pigmented dopaminergic neurons of the substantia nigra pars compacta and the presence of Lewy bodies and Lewy neurites.

Signs and symptoms

Initial clinical symptoms of Parkinson disease include the following:

• Tremor
  
• Subtle decrease in dexterity
  
• Decreased arm swing on the first-involved side
  
• Soft voice
  
• Decreased facial expression
  
• Sleep disturbances
  
• Rapid eye movement (REM) behavior disorder (RBD; a loss of normal atonia during REM sleep)
  
• Decreased sense of smell
  
• Symptoms of autonomic dysfunction (eg, constipation, sweating abnormalities, sexual dysfunction, seborrheic dermatitis)
  
• A general feeling of weakness, malaise, or lassitude
  
• Depression or anhedonia
  
• Slowness in thinkin

Onset of motor signs include the following:

• Typically asymmetric
  
• The most common initial finding is a resting tremor in an upper extremity
  
• Over time, patients experience progressive bradykinesia, rigidity, and gait difficulty
  
• Axial posture becomes progressively flexed and strides become shorter
  
• Postural instability (balance impairment) is a late phenomenon

Nonmotor symptoms

Nonmotor symptoms are common in early Parkinson disease. Recognition of the combination of nonmotor and motor symptoms can promote early diagnosis and thus early intervention, which often results in a better quality of life.

Diagnosis

Parkinson disease is a clinical diagnosis. No laboratory biomarkers exist for the condition, and findings on routine magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography scans are unremarkable.

Clinical diagnosis requires the presence of 2 of 3 cardinal signs:

• Resting tremor
  
• Rigidity
  
• Bradykinesia
  

Management

The goal of medical management of Parkinson disease is to provide control of signs and symptoms for as long as possible while minimizing adverse effects.

Symptomatic drug therapy

• Usually provides good control of motor signs of Parkinson disease for 4-6 years
  
• Levodopa/carbidopa: The gold standard of symptomatic treatment
  
• Monoamine oxidase (MAO)–B inhibitors: Can be considered for initial treatment of early disease
  
• Other dopamine agonists (eg, ropinirole, pramipexole): Monotherapy in early disease and adjunctive therapy in moderate to advanced disease
  
• Anticholinergic agents (eg, trihexyphenidyl, benztropine): Second-line drugs for tremor only
  

Treatment for nonmotor symptoms

• Sildenafil citrate (Viagra): For erectile dysfunction
  
• Polyethylene glycol: For constipation
  
• Modafinil: For excessive daytime somnolence
  
• Methylphenidate: For fatigue (potential for abuse and addiction)
  

Deep brain stimulation

• Surgical procedure of choice for Parkinson disease
  
• Does not involve destruction of brain tissue
  
• Reversible
  
• Can be adjusted as the disease progresses or adverse events occur
  
• Bilateral procedures can be performed without a significant increase in adverse events
  

Prognosis

Before the introduction of levodopa, Parkinson disease caused severe disability or death in 25% of patients within 5 years of onset, 65% within 10 years, and 89% within 15 years. The mortality rate from Parkinson disease was 3 times that of the general population matched for age, sex, and racial origin. With the introduction of levodopa, the mortality rate dropped approximately 50%, and longevity was extended by many years. This is thought to be due to the symptomatic effects of levodopa, as no clear evidence suggests that levodopa stems the progressive nature of the disease.

The American Academy of Neurology notes that the following clinical features may help predict the rate of progression of Parkinson disease :
Older age at onset and initial rigidity/hypokinesia can be used to predict (1) a more rapid rate of motor progression in those with newly diagnosed Parkinson disease and (2) earlier development of cognitive decline and dementia; however, initially presenting with tremor may predict a more benign disease course and longer therapeutic benefit from levodopa
A faster rate of motor progression may also be predicted if the patient is male, has associated comorbidities, and has postural instability/gait difficulty (PIGD)
Older age at onset, dementia, and decreased responsiveness to dopaminergic therapy may predict earlier nursing home placement and decreased survival
Patient Education

Patients with Parkinson disease should be encouraged to participate in decision making regarding their condition. In addition, individuals and their caregivers should be provided with information that is appropriate for their disease state and expected or ongoing challenges. Psychosocial support and concerns should be addressed and/or referred to a social worker or psychologist as needed.

Prevention of falls should be discussed. The UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence has several guidance documents including those for patients and caregivers.

Other issues that commonly need to be addressed at appropriate times in the disease course include cognitive decline, personality changes, depression, dysphagia, sleepiness and fatigue, and impulse control disorders. Additional information is also often needed for financial planning, insurance issues, disability application, and placement (assisted living facility, nursing home).

Can Particles in Dairy and Beef Cause Cancer and MS?

In our Western diet, dairy and beef are ubiquitous: Milk goes with coffee, melted cheese with pizza, and chili with rice. But what if dairy products and beef contained a new kind of pathogen that could infect you as a child and trigger cancer or multiple sclerosis (MS) 40-70 years later?

Researchers from the German Cancer Research Center(DKFZ) suspect that such zoonoses are possibly widespread and are therefore recommending that infants not be given dairy products until they are at least age 1 year. However, in two joint statements, the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) and the Max Rubner Institute (MRI) have rejected such theories.

In 2008, Harald zur Hausen, MD, DSc, received the Nobel Prize in Medicine for his discovery that human papillomaviruses cause cervical cancer. His starting point was the observation that sexually abstinent women, such as nuns, rarely develop this cancer. So it was possible to draw the conclusion that pathogens are transmitted during sexual intercourse, explain zur Hausen and his wife Ethel-Michele de Villiers, PhD, both of DKFZ Heidelberg.

Papillomaviruses, as well as human herpes and Epstein-Barr viruses (EBV), polyomaviruses, and retroviruses, cause cancer in a direct way: by inserting their genes into the DNA of human cells. With a latency of a few years to a few decades, the proteins formed through expression stimulate malignant growth by altering the regulating host gene.

Acid Radicals 

However, viruses — just like bacteria and parasites — can also indirectly trigger cancer. One mechanism for this triggering is the disruption of immune defenses, as shown by the sometimes drastically increased tumor incidence with AIDS or with immunosuppressants after transplants. Chronic inflammation is a second mechanism that generates acid radicals and thereby causes random mutations in replicating cells. Examples include stomach cancer caused by Helicobacter pyloriand liver cancer caused by Schistosoma, liver fluke, and hepatitis B and C viruses.

According to de Villiers and zur Hausen, there are good reasons to believe that other pathogens could cause chronic inflammation and thereby lead to cancer. Epidemiologic data suggest that dairy and meat products from European cows (Bos taurus) are a potential source. This is because colon cancer and breast cancer commonly occur in places where these foods are heavily consumed (ie, in North America, Argentina, Europe, and Australia). In contrast, the rate is low in India, where cows are revered as holy animals. Also noteworthy is that women with a lactose intolerance rarely develop breast cancer.

Viral Progeny 

In fact, the researchers found single-stranded DNA rings that originated in viruses, which they named bovine meat and milk factors (BMMF), in the intestines of patients with colon cancer. They reported, "This new class of pathogen deserves, in our opinion at least, to become the focus of cancer development and further chronic diseases." They also detected elevated levels of acid radicals in these areas (ie, oxidative stress), which is typical for chronic inflammation.

The researchers assume that infants, whose immune system is not yet fully matured, ingest the BMMF as soon as they have dairy. Therefore, there is no need for adults to avoid dairy or beef because everyone is infected anyway, said zur Hausen in a speech.

'Breast Milk Is Healthy'

De Villiers and zur Hausen outlined more evidence of cancer-triggering pathogens. Mothers who have breastfed are less likely, especially after multiple pregnancies, to develop tumors in various organs or to have from MS and type 2 diabetes. The authors attribute the protective effect to oligosaccharides in breast milk, which begin to be formed midway through the pregnancy. They bind to lectin receptors and, in so doing, mask the terminal molecule onto which the viruses need to dock. As a result, their port of entry into the cells is blocked.

The oligosaccharides also protect the baby against life-threatening infections by blocking access by rotaviruses and noroviruses. In this way, especially if breastfeeding lasts a long time — around 1 year — the period of incomplete immunocompetence is bridged.

Colon Cancer 

To date, it has been assumed that around 20% of all cancerous diseases globally are caused by infections, said the researchers. But if the suspected BMMF cases are included, this figure rises to 50%, even to around 80%, for colon cancer. If the suspicion is confirmed, the consequences for prevention and therapy would be significant.

The voice of a Nobel prize winner undoubtedly carries weight, but at the time, zur Hausen still had to convince a host of skeptics with his discovery that a viral infection is a major cause of cervical cancer. Nonetheless, some indicators suggest that he and his wife have found a dead end this time.

Institutional Skepticism 

When his working group made the results public in February 2019, the DKFZ felt the need to give an all-clear signal in response to alarmed press reports. There is no reason to see dairy and meat consumption as something negative. Similarly, in their first joint statement, the BfR and the MRI judged the data to be insufficient and called for further studies. Multiple research teams began to focus on BMMF as a result. In what foods can they be found? Are they more common in patients with cancer than in healthy people? Are they infectious? Do they cause inflammation and cancer?

The findings presented in a second statement by the BfR and MRI at the end of November 2022 contradicted the claims made by the DKFZ scientists across the board. In no way do BMMF represent new pathogens. They are variants of already known DNA sequences. In addition, they are present in numerous animal-based and plant-based foods, including pork, fish, fruit, vegetables, and nuts.

BMMF do not possess the ability to infect human cells, the institutes said. The proof that they are damaging to one's health was also absent. It is true that the incidence of intestinal tumors correlates positively with the consumption of red and processed meat — which in no way signifies causality — but dairy products are linked to a reduced risk. On the other hand, breast cancer cannot be associated with the consumption of beef or dairy.

Therefore, both institutes recommend continuing to use these products as supplementary diet for infants due to their micronutrients. They further stated that the products are safe for people of all ages.

Association With MS? 

Unperturbed, de Villiers and zur Hausen went one step further in their current article. They posited that MS is also associated with the consumption of dairy products and beef. Here too geographic distribution prompted the idea to look for BMMF in the brain lesions of patients with MS. The researchers isolated ring-shaped DNA molecules that proved to be closely related to BMMF from dairy and cattle blood. "The result was electrifying for us."However, there are several other factors to consider, such as vitamin D3 deficiency. This is because the incidence of MS decreases the further you travel from the poles toward the equator (ie, as solar radiation increases). Also, the EBV clearly plays a role because patients with MS display increased titers of EBV antibodies. One study also showed that people in Antarctica excreted reactivated EBV in their saliva during winter and that vitamin D3 stopped the viral secretion.

Under these conditions, the researchers hypothesized that MS is caused by a double infection of brain cells by EBV and BMMF. EBV is reactivated by a lack of vitamin D3, and the BMMF multiply and are eventually converted into proteins. A focal immunoreaction causes the Schwann cells and oligodendrocytes to malfunction, which leads to the destruction of the myelin sheaths around the nerve fibers.

Scientists have finally decoded the bizarre behaviors of brain cells — and recreated them in tiny computer chips.

The tiny neurons could change the way we build medical devices because they replicate healthy biological activity but require only a billionth of the energy needed by microprocessors, according to a University of Bath press release.

Neurons behave similar to electrical circuits within the body, but their behavior is less predictable — especially when it comes to parsing the relationship between their input and output electrical impulses. But these new artificial brain cells successfully mimic the behavior of rat neurons from two specific regions of the brain, according to research published Tuesday in Nature Communications.

“Until now neurons have been like black boxes, but we have managed to open the black box and peer inside,” University of Bath physicist Alain Nogaret said in the release. “Our work is paradigm changing because it provides a robust method to reproduce the electrical properties of real neurons in minute detail.”

The ultimate goal is to use these neurons to build medical devices that can better cater to patients’ needs, like a smarter pacemaker that can respond to new stressors and demands on a person’s heart — essentially upgrading devices to be more in tune with the body.

Julian Paton, a physiologist at the universities of Auckland and Bristol, said in the release that recreating biological activity was exciting because it “opens up enormous opportunities for smarter medical devices that drive towards personalized medicine approaches to a range of diseases and disabilities.”

Is Homeopathy a system of alternative medicine or just an expensive placebo therapy?

I welcome your valuable comments on this topic or your own experience of using the system of Homeopathy for any ailments.

Please comments below. I may or may not be using your comments or part of your comments (ensured complete anonymity) in a book /paper that I am currently working on. I also given a couple of useful links in the comments section. (Krishna)
----------------------------------------------------
Following a philosophy of ‘like treats like”, German physician and chemist Samuel Hahnemann developed homeopathy in 1796. He restored health by administering highly diluted amounts of substances such as arsenic, belladonna, sepia, nutmeg or chamomile, which, in larger quantities, cause symptoms like those suffered by the patient.

He believed that the water retained a memory of the vital essence of the substance used. Scientists have long questioned the very basis of homeopathy because it seems implausible for such diluted forms of a chemical to have any medical or pharmacological action. In most cases, the final homeopathic preparation does not contain a single molecule of the original herb or mineral.

Most of the developed countries like USA, UK, Australia, Canada, France etc. doesn't approve Homeopathy as a modern system of medicine. Most of the scientific studies suggested that Homeopathy has just a placebo effects. Over the past decade, modern science has dismissed homeopathy as nothing more what it appears to be: sugar pills that do nothing more than give you empty calories.

A major nail in the coffin was an analysis of 110 homoeopathy trials and 110 matched conventional-medicine trials published in The Lancet in 2005 that concluded “the clinical effects of homoeopathy are placebo effects”. It found homoeopathic treatments were not more effective than dummy pills, but allopathic medicine were.

India is among the world’s biggest market for homeopathy in the world, pegged at Rs 1,500 crore and projected to grow by 20% each year. India has 195 homeopathic medical colleges, 51 homeopathic universities and 27 state councils, which train and register thousands of practitioners each year. Why Indian people are relying on this 'system of placebo therapy ' which has no medicinal benefits but purely works on psychological effects.

According to India’s Ministry of Ayush, it is the second most popular system of medicine after allopathy in the country with roughly 10% of the population relying soley on homeopathy for treatment.

Nobel laureate Venkatraman Ramakrishnan put the spotlight on homeopathy when he dismissed it as bogus science, but it’s business as usual for the 2.65 lakh registered practitioners of homeopathy in India.

“No one in chemistry believes in homoeopathy. It works because of placebo effect,” said Ramakrishnan, the India-born President of the Royal Society, who won the Nobel for Chemistry in 2009, speaking at the Panjab University at Chandigarh.

And, now Russia declares Homeopathy a Junk Science and planning to ban this system of alternative medicine.

Russia's Commission against Pseudoscience has called for the Health Ministry to ban homeopathy; however, the psychological effect of the medicine will continue to ensure its popularity (https://sputniknews.com/…/201702121050597972-russia-homeop…/)

Cure for Cancer! The Executioner Protein

Researchers Find “Executioner Protein” That Causes Cancer Cells to Self-Destruct Without Hurting Healthy Cells!

Scientists have discovered a way to use the "executioner protein" BAX to induce apoptosis in cancer cells while leaving healthy cells intact. The treatment has so far been applied only to acute myeloid leukemia (AML) cells but may have broader uses.

KILLING CANCER WITH APOPTOSIS
Albert Einstein College of Medicine scientists have induced cancer cells to commit suicide with a new compound that leaves healthy cells untouched. They deployed their novel treatment approach against acute myeloid leukemia (AML) cells, which kill more than 10,000 Americans, and makes up about one-third of all new cases of leukemia, each year. Patients survive AML at a rate of only about 30 percent, making effective new treatments a hot commodity. And although the team has only tested the treatment on AML, it could have the potential to successfully attack other varieties of cancer cells.

“We’re hopeful that the targeted compounds we’re developing will prove more effective than current anti-cancer therapies by directly causing cancer cells to self-destruct,” associate professor of medicine and biochemistry and senior author Evripidis Gavathiotis said in a press release. “Ideally, our compounds would be combined with other treatments to kill cancer cells faster and more efficiently—and with fewer adverse effects, which are an all-too-common problem with standard chemotherapies.”

KILLING CANCER WITH APOPTOSIS
Albert Einstein College of Medicine scientists have induced cancer cells to commit suicide with a new compound that leaves healthy cells untouched. They deployed their novel treatment approach against acute myeloid leukemia (AML) cells, which kill more than 10,000 Americans, and makes up about one-third of all new cases of leukemia, each year. Patients survive AML at a rate of only about 30 percent, making effective new treatments a hot commodity. And although the team has only tested the treatment on AML, it could have the potential to successfully attack other varieties of cancer cells.

“We’re hopeful that the targeted compounds we’re developing will prove more effective than current anti-cancer therapies by directly causing cancer cells to self-destruct,” associate professor of medicine and biochemistry and senior author Evripidis Gavathiotis said in a press release. “Ideally, our compounds would be combined with other treatments to kill cancer cells faster and more efficiently—and with fewer adverse effects, which are an all-too-common problem with standard chemotherapies.”

The new compound fights cancer by triggering apoptosis: a natural process the body uses to get rid of malfunctioning and unwanted cells. Apoptosis also takes place during embryonic development: trimming excess tissue from the growing embryo, for example. While certain existing chemotherapy drugs induce apoptosis indirectly by damaging the DNA in cancer cells, this treatment directly triggers the process intentionally by activating BAX, the “executioner protein.”

THE EXECUTIONER PROTEIN
Pro-apoptopic proteins activate BAX in cells. Once BAX molecules go to work, they find the mitochondria of target cells and drill lethal holes into them, scuttling their ability to produce energy. Cancer cells resist BAX and this process by producing large quantities of “anti-apoptotic” proteins that suppress BAX and even the proteins that activate it. The process discovered by these researchers wakes BAX up again and sends it back to work.

“Our novel compound revives suppressed BAX molecules in cancer cells by binding with high affinity to BAX’s activation site,” Dr. Gavathiotis said in the release. “BAX can then swing into action, killing cancer cells while leaving healthy cells unscathed.”

In 2008, Dr. Gavathiotis was part of the team that first described the BAX’s activation site’s shape and structure. Since that time, he has been searching for small molecules to activate BAX and produce sufficient activity to overpower the natural resistance cancer cells mount to apoptosis. His team screened more than one million compounds and narrowed the field to 500, many of them synthesized by the team, and then evaluated them. These results reveal the outcome of that search.

BTSA1 (short for BAX Trigger Site Activator 1) was the best compound against several different human AML cell lines, including those found in high-risk AML patients. BTSA1 was also able to induce apoptosis in AML cells without affecting healthy stem cells. In AML mice treated with the compound, there was a significantly longer survival rate: 43 percent of the control group was alive and AML-free after 60 days. The BTSA1-treated mice also exhibited no signs of toxicity.

“BTSA1 activates BAX and causes apoptosis in AML cells while sparing healthy cells and tissues—probably because the cancer cells are primed for apoptosis,” Dr. Gavathiotis said in the release. Next the team plans to test BTSA1 on other types of cancer using animal models.

New Research Shows That Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Isn’t Just “All in Your Head”

Researchers have discovered that people with chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis have elevated levels of seven specific species of gut bacteria. This discovery could lead to targeted diagnostic tools and treatments for the disease.

CHRONIC FATIGUE SYNDROME

Chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME/CFS) is a debilitating disorder. The fatigue and other symptoms it causes result in an inability to participate in the daily activities of life for many sufferers. Although more than one million Americans have ME/CFS — more than lupus, multiple sclerosis, and some types of cancer — there is not yet any treatment, or meaningful diagnostic tool. Four times as many women suffer from ME/CFS, and it lasts for years in some patients.

Although the disease was previously thought of as some kind of imaginary ailment, ME/CFS is now being taken seriously by researchers. This week, new research published in Microbiome reveals that people who have ME/CFS also have abnormal levels of specific gut bacteria — and the levels of bacteria vary with symptom severity.

“By identifying the specific bacteria involved, we are one step closer to more accurate diagnosis and targeted therapies,” head researcher Ian Lipkin said in a press release from the Center for Infection and Immunity (CII) and the Mailman School of Public Health of Columbia University.

The team carefully matched, and then followed, 50 ME/CFS patients and 50 healthy controls. They took fecal and blood samples from all participants, and tested the fecal samples for bacterial species and the blood for immune molecules. Seven distinct species of intestinal bacteria were so strongly associated with ME/CFS that an accurate diagnosis could be predicted based on the elevated presence of all of them.

Although this study included a small sample, subject to further verification, this research could be the first step toward targeted diagnostic tools and treatments for the disease.

References: ScienceAlert - Latest, Microbiome Journal, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, CDC

Can WiFi cause cancer?

WiFi operates in the 2 to 5 GHz range - part of the microwave portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. This is in the same part of the spectrum where cell phones operate so I may refer to WiFi or cellphone electromagnetic radiation interchangeably. These are radio waves - no different than those used to broadcast television programs - except that they are higher in frequency. They aren't nearly as high a frequency as visible light - and no one worries about getting cancer from visible light (ultraviolet light, on the other hand, causes skin cancer - but this is the minimum energy necessary to cause ionizations that can cause breaks in strands of DNA - which is the mechanism by which cancer cells can be created). There is no credible evidence that non-ionizing radiation has any adverse health effects at all. There is no radiobiologic mechanism that could explain such an association - and absolutely no scientifically valid evidence that this has ever happened.

Dr Garry Larson MD, Medical Director- Procure Proton Therapy Center OKC states that he has treated patients with cancer for over thirty years as a board certified radiation oncologist and he is familiar with every carcinogenic agent known to man - He is with absolute certainty that radio waves cannot harm you (unless perhaps you were in the path of a multi-megawatt microwave beam in which case they might cook you - but as far as he knows, there is no likelihood that this danger even exists).

There has never been (and will never be) a randomised trial assessing the cause and effect relationship between radio frequency emissions and neoplastic disease. In order to have a randomised study, half of the randomly selected subjects would need to avoid cellphone use and that's not going to happen.

Humans have been exposed to man-made radio frequency radiation for over 100 years and we have always been exposed to microwave radiation from the Cosmos.

For example, the latency period for radiation induced malignancies is, on the average say 20 years, but epidemiologic studies of large groups of people (that only require a few thousand patients to reach stastistical significance) exposed to ionizing radiation start showing an increase above baseline by seven years. So conservatively, there should be at least a few excess cases of glioma, caused by cellular (or WiFi) electromagnetic radiation by now.

See this reference which looks at all the reported cases of gliomas caused by ionizing radiation (where we have a plausible explanation for cause and effect). Millions of people have received brain irradiation and only 73 cases of radiation induced gliomas have been reported.

A Report on Radiation-Induced Gliomas

We do have evidence that cellphones (or WiFi) do NOT cause an increase in brain tumors. Look at the time period over which cellphone use became common - say over the last twenty years. During that time, the incidence of brain tumours has remained absolutely flat. With over four billion people using cellphones (or WiFi) today, if there was any influence on the development of brain tumors, we would be seeing that by now.

The data from the National Cancer Institute below shows no increase in the incidence of primary brain tumours over the period of time that cell phones have been in use.

Say someone found a potential association between carrying coins in your pocket and the risk of a particular type of tumour. It would set off a frenzy of activity among a group of people who were convinced that this association was real. They would lobby for a law requiring that warning signs be placed on change machines. The effect would snowball until some people would demand that the government stop minting coins.

So lets review

There is no biologic mechanism to explain why non ionizing radiation (like the cellphone's emission of radio waves) could induce any type of tumour
We do have a mechanism to explain the association between ionizing radiation and tumour induction, but out of millions of people who have received radiation therapy to their brain, only 73 radiation induced gliomas have been reported in the world's literature.
For radiation induced neoplasms in general, epidemiologic studies can show an increase in the likelihood of tumours with only a few thousand people over a time period less than ten years

At least something on the order of millions (if not billions) of people have used cell phones for over two decades now and there is no evidence that the incidence of brain tumors has increased over that time period
Now lets get down to why this sort of irrational belief takes hold and, among other things, prompts five questions on this subject (at least that I have seen) in the time that I have been reading Quora (less than two months).

We have essentially no control over whether we live or die - except that we should avoid dangerous behaviours like smoking, becoming obese, not wearing seat belts, texting while driving, etc. Otherwise, over a trillion cells carry on countless biochemical processes that we have no control over. One out of four people will get cancer - beyond avoiding foolish behaviour, we can't influence that risk.

Since we have this subconscious, ever present fear of death (see below*), we employ magical thinking to give us a false sense of power over it. When we create artificial threats to our survival in our imagination - and then avoid practicing behaviours that make us vulnerable to those threats - we feel we have some power over whether we live or die. These are also know as superstitions.

Primitive cultures made sacrifices to imaginary gods so they wouldn't destroy their village - Children learn to avoid stepping on cracks - The germaphobe may engage in compulsive hand washing - and some people avoid putting their cellphone right next to their skin.

Vivek Murthy, MD, Replaced as Surgeon General of America

The Trump administration removed Vivek Murthy, MD, on April 21 from his position as surgeon general in the middle of his 4-year term.

His temporary replacement is a nurse, Sylvia Trent-Adams, RN, PhD, formerly the deputy surgeon general.

The 39-year-old Dr Murthy was a holdover from the Obama administration who was confirmed by the Senate in a mostly party-line 51-to-43 vote in December 2014. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced that Dr Murthy was asked to resign and ""relieved of his duties"" after assisting the new administration in its transition. HHS Secretary Tom Price, MD, "thanks him for his dedicated service to the nation," according to the agency's news release, adding that Dr Murthy will continue to serve as a member of the US Public Health Service (USPHS) Commissioned Corps.
The USPHS Commissioned Corps and its 6600 uniformed health professionals are overseen by the surgeon general.

Surgeon generals have 4-year terms, and some have begun their term under one party's flag and finished it — or served out much of it — under another flag. The most recent example was former Surgeon General David Satcher, MD, PhD, a Bill Clinton appointee who completed his 4 years during the George W. Bush administration.

HHS did not give a reason why Dr Murthy was relieved of his duties. However, his track record holds some possible clues. Senate Republicans opposed his nomination in part because they viewed him as a political partisan. During the 2008 presidential election, Dr Murthy co-chaired a group called Doctors for Obama, and he later helped lead a successor group called Doctors for America that supported passage of the Affordable Care Act. He also incurred the wrath of the National Rifle Association and its congressional allies for declaring gun violence a public health issue.
Georges Benjamin, MD, the executive director of the American Public Health Association, said he was surprised by Dr Murthy's dismissal.

"I knew he anticipated completing his four years," Dr Benjamin told Medscape Medical News, noting that he had been in touch with Dr Murthy. "He was expecting to do that."
The Trump administration's removal of Dr Murthy "is another way of politicizing the job, which is inappropriate," said Dr Benjamin. "The reason why the surgeon general has a term is to depoliticize the position."
Efforts to reach Dr Murthy for an interview were unsuccessful. However, he did speak for himself in a post on his Facebook page. There, he said that he had been terminated for taking a principled stand.
"Many have asked why I chose not to resign as Surgeon General when I was asked to do so," he wrote. "My reason was simple: because I would never willfully abandon my commitment to my Commissioned Corps officers, to the American people, and to all who have stood with me to build a healthier and more compassionate America."

Lesson Learned: "Choose Love"

Before serving as surgeon general, Dr Murthy was a hospitalist at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts, and an instructor in medicine at Harvard Medical School. He also cofounded a nonprofit group promoting HIV/AIDS education and a company that makes software for clinical trials.
One of Dr Murthy's top priorities as surgeon general was what he called "tobacco and drug-free living." To that end, he sent a letter to more than 1 million prescribers in November 2016 asking them to help battle the opioid epidemic, in part through better prescribing habits. Later that month, he released a major report on substance abuse that was likened to the surgeon general's landmark report on smoking issued in 1964.
In December 2016, Dr Murthy followed up with a report that called e-cigarettes a public health crisis for the nation's youth.
"I thought he was visible on the right issues," said the APHA's Dr Benjamin.
In another post on his Facebook page, Dr Murthy reflected on his brief tenure as surgeon general.

"For the grandson of a poor farmer from India to be asked by the president to look out for the health of an entire nation was a humbling and uniquely American story," he wrote. "While I had hoped to do more to help our nation tackle its biggest health challenges, I will be forever grateful for the opportunity to have served."
He listed a number of lessons he picked up on the job.

"We will only be successful in addressing addiction — and other illnesses — when we recognize the humanity within each of us," he wrote. "People are more than their disease. All of us are more than our worse mistakes."
And this: "The world is locked in a struggle between love and fear. Choose love. It is the world's oldest medicine."

Dr Murthy said the nation will be in "capable and compassionate hands" with Dr Trent-Adams taking over as acting surgeon general.
A 24-year veteran of the USPHS Commissioned Corps, Dr Trent-Adams has served as chief nursing officer of the USPHS and the deputy associate administrator for the HIV/AIDS Bureau in HHS. Before joining the USPHS Commissioned Corps, she was a nurse in the US Army and a research nurse at the University of Maryland.