The vast array of plants in nature includes carnivorous plants that kill to survive. How can a plant zap a flying or crawling insect? By using a highly evolved group of compounds and secondary metabolites to trap and absorb prey. Now Tel Aviv University researchers say they’ve found a way these natural plant compounds could benefit human health by fighting serious fungal infections.

The Venus fly trap is probably the best known example of a carnivorous plant. Native to the tropics, these plants lure unsuspecting beetles, ants, flies and other creatures into a cavity filled with liquid that botanists call a “pitcher”. The instant insects fall into this trap, enzymes are activated that dissolve the bugs and provide the plant with needed nutrients, such as carbon and nitrogen, which can be difficult to extract from soil.

For a study just published in the Journal of Experimental Biology, the Israeli researchers investigated the biology of the carnivorous plant Nepenthes khasiana, which is native to India.

In a media statement, Prof. Aviah Zilberstein of Tel Aviv University’s Department of Plant Sciences concluded the compounds in this plant could serve as a new class of anti-fungal drugs for use in human medicine. That’s because the unusual natural compounds obtained from the plant’s pitcher — specifically those known as secondary metabolites — were found to be effective anti-fungal agents against human fungal infections that are often widespread in hospitals.

According to the media statement, there is a need for additional broadly effective anti-fungal therapies because even mildly severe cases of athlete’s foot or other skin fungal infections can be difficult to cure with current drug therapies. The most serious aspect of fungal infections often occurs in hospitals, where thousands of Americans die annually from secondary fungal infections they acquired as patients.

The idea that liquid from a carnivorous plant’s pitcher can prevent or treat infection is nothing new. In fact, the use of this substance has been recorded in the ancient folk literature of India, where people drink carnivorous plant pitcher “juice” as a general health aid. “There is a lot of room for developing compounds from nature into new drugs,” Prof. Zilberstein stated in the media statement. “The one we are working on is not toxic to humans. Now we hope to show how this very natural product can be further developed as a means to overcome some basic problems in hospitals all over the world.”

http://www.naturalnews.com/028330_fungal_infections_remedies.html

A case involving genetically modified (GM) food will be in front of a federal judge Friday in San Francisco.

Researchers say the future of generations of Americans hangs in the balance, as the judge could order a halt to the planting or harvesting of any GM “Roundup Ready” sugar beets in the U.S.

This would strike a blow to growers in the Red River Valley, where more sugar beets are grown than any other region. Most of these growers have already been using Roundup Ready seed varieties for two years.

Scientists say that is no type of positive proof. GM foods are put through a complicated unnatural process. Our reporter April Scott took this on just a few days ago in her article, While We Were Sleeping… GM Food and the Brink of No Return[1]

“The process behind genetically modified food involves a careful re-configuration of genes combining e-coli bacteria, soil bacteria and the cauliflower mosaic virus that causes tumors in plants. They add an antibiotic and then artificially force it into plant cells with a gene invasion technique. All this is so farmers can douse nearly unlimited amounts of Roundup Herbicide on the crops and the plants won’t die.”

Professor Robert Kremer
Photo: plantsci.missouri.edu

The Organic & Non-GMO Report published an article in January, stating that scientists are finding many negative impacts of Roundup Ready GM crops.

They say the USDA doesn’t want to publicize studies showing negative impacts.

They spoke to Robert Kremer, a microbiologist with the US Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Research Service and an adjunct professor in the Division of Plant Sciences at the University of Missouri.

He is co-author of one of five papers published in the October 2009 issue of The European Journal of Agronomy that found negative impacts of Roundup herbicide, which is used extensively with Roundup Ready genetically modified crops.

Kremer has been studying the impacts of glyphosate, the primary ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide, since 1997.

The Organic & Non-GMO Report interviewed Mr. Kremer about his research and the reluctance of the USDA to publicize the findings of the five papers.

Please give me an overview of your research
RK: We started in 1997 wanting to see if this new system, Roundup Ready, would change the production of nematodes in soybean. We started looking at organisms in soybean roots and saw microorganisms colonizing the roots. We suspected that glyphosate was having an impact. There was a root fungi problem that seemed to be encouraging sudden death syndrome (SDS).
We saw the increase of these fungi in the Roundup Ready (genetically modified) system, both soybeans and corn.

What types of things are you seeing in the Roundup Ready system?
RK: This system is altering the whole soil biology. We are seeing differences in bacteria in plant roots and changes in nutrient availability. Glyphosate is very systemic in the plant and is being released through the roots into the soil. Many studies show that glyphosate can have toxic effects on microorganisms and can stimulate them to germinate spores and colonize root systems. Other researchers are showing that glyphosate can immobilize manganese, an essential plant micronutrient.

What are glyphosate’s impacts on beneficial soil bacteria?
RK: The most obvious impact is on rhizobia, a bacterium that fixes nitrogen. It has been shown that glyphosate can be toxic to rhizobia. (Nitrogen fixing bacteria are important to soils because nitrogen is the most commonly deficient nutrient in many soils.)

What about research showing increased incidence of Fusarium in Roundup Ready GM crops?
RK: We’ve taken field surveys and seen an increase in Fusarium with the use of glyphosate. Some Roundup Ready varieties even without using glyphosate tend to be more susceptible to being impacted by Fusarium. It could be an unintended consequence of genetic manipulation that could make it more susceptible.

Your paper also mentioned the potential of glyphosate to contaminate groundwater.
RK: Yes, under certain circumstances. The big assumption for claims that glyphosate is benign is that it isn’t immediately absorbed by the soil. But research is showing that isn’t necessarily true; that it is still available in the soil.
If soil is full of phosphorous, glyphosate could leach into ground water. For example, farmers may use manure from confined animal feeding operations as a fertilizer. The soil will then contain high amounts of phosphorus, which overwhelms the soil. Any glyphosate that hits the soil will be a potential contaminant. It can stay in the soil or it might run off into streams or waterways.

What about glyphosate resistant weeds?
RK: We have eight different species of glyphosate resistant weeds in Missouri. Some species of Johnson Grass are found in fields where Roundup is used year after year. It is a very aggressive weed.
To solve the problem of weed resistance, genetic engineers are developing soybeans that tolerate Roundup and Dicamba, another herbicide. They are incorporating another gene resistant to another herbicide. When resistance happens again, will they then develop a plant resistant to five or six herbicides? It’s an illogical circle.

With so much glyphosate being used, what types of long-term impacts do you think could occur?
RK: We are already seeing glyphosate-resistant weeds. If we continue to use glyphosate in the same fields year after year, it’s a matter of time until microbial communities in the soil will shift to more detrimental species.
The use of glyphosate stimulates detrimental pathogens in the growing season but they go back down after the growing season. Eventually, they may build up in the soil and not go back down.

Are many researchers looking at the possibly negative impacts of glyphosate or Roundup Ready crops?
RK: There are a handful of researchers. There is more research looking at the production of these crops.

The papers published in the European Journal of Agronomy received no publicity in the United States. Why is that?
RK: I was working with USDA-ARS to publish a news release about these studies. I’ve gone all the way to the administrators, but they are reluctant to put something out. Their thinking is that if farmers are using this (Roundup Ready) technology, USDA doesn’t want negative information being released about it. This is how it is. I think the news release is still sitting on someone’s desk.

What about your future research?
RK: We’re looking at some methods that could be used to overcome negative effects if we continue to use Roundup Ready crops, such as supplementation of nutrients by foliar application. I’m more interested in sustainable agriculture. More farmers are interested in using cover cropping to maintain soil quality and other organic amendments. But it’s a steep learning curve for them.

Monsanto

One of the primary proponents behind GM food is the Monsanto group, they brought Americans and Vietnamese the memorable cancer causing Agent Orange, a defoliant sprayed over the jungles during the Vietnam War. It has caused terrible birth defects and abnormalities in the children of those exposed to it.

Our writers Chuck Palazzo and John Paul Rossie, both report about the issues facing human beings as a result of the extensive military use of Agent Orange.

No Vietnam Veterans will tell you Monsanto is a good company[3].

The research says they are doing it to us again with GM foods, and roping the farmers into using these controversial methods because there is more profit involved, with no regard for what ingesting these things really does or will mean to the human body, already overwhelmed by so many preservatives and questionable ingredients[4].

The judge’s decision could affect many in agriculture. Besides the growers and other share owners, thousands of people work in the plants and drive beet-hauling trucks, an article in the Grand Fork Herald explains[2].

So lawyers from the group American Crystal will be on hand to do everything they can to persuade the judge not to put forth the order halting the planting of the controversial products.

It seems a tall order to believe that something controversial and fairly new could have such an impact, they have always grown sugar beets, but they never profited the way they do now.

The company’s lawyers will use the fact that many people could potentially lose their jobs as a bargaining chip, along with “we have already been doing this for two years” as if that is any kind of proof.

Proof of profit perhaps, by tricking nature, in a nation that freaks out over stem cell research to save human lives, but allows the corporate sector to go mad and bring these potentially dangerous products to our dinner tables.

And they are trying all over the world to get governments and companies to buy in. It is a travesty and sooner or later somebody is going to put their foot down over these reckless attempts to push profits by selling products that are not fully tested or evaluated.

Good decisions have emerged from the San Francisco Federal Court in the past, we will see what happens.

[1] Mar-01-2010: While We Were Sleeping… GM Food and the Brink of No Return – April Scott Salem-News.com

[2] Mar-01-2010: Sugar beet case could loom large – Stephen J. Lee, Grand Forks Herald

[3] Nov-21-2009: Living the Lie: Agent Orange Activist Confronts MonsantoSalem-News.com

[4] Feb-21-2010: More on Monsanto, Agent Orange, Recent Trickery and Profiteering – Chuck Palazzo Salem-News.com

=================================================
Tim King is a former U.S. Marine with twenty years of experience on the west coast as a television news producer, photojournalist, reporter and assignment editor. In addition to his role as a war correspondent, this Los Angeles native serves as Salem-News.com’s Executive News Editor. Tim spent the winter of 2006/07 covering the war in Afghanistan, and he was in Iraq over the summer of 2008, reporting from the war while embedded with both the U.S. Army and the Marines. Tim holds numerous awards for reporting, photography, writing and editing, including the Oregon AP Award for Spot News Photographer of the Year (2004), first place Electronic Media Award in Spot News, Las Vegas, (1998), Oregon AP Cooperation Award (1991); and several others including the 2005 Red Cross Good Neighborhood Award for reporting. Serving the community in very real terms, Salem-News.com is the nation’s only truly independent high traffic news Website. You can send Tim an email at this address: newsroom@salem-news.com

http://www.salem-news.com/articles/march052010/roundup-judge.php

Monsanto the company, its executives, and many of their employees in middle and upper management (and probably the rank and file as well) knew and know exactly what is going on with the company. Why should anyone from the inside blow the whistle? They are very well paid and they are deemed to be an excellent company to work for (morality and war crimes and playing God aside, of course).

In addition, the so-called revolving door of US (and probably other) government officials who once worked for Monsanto are now on the various government’s side – and vice versa – so many former government officials are now employed by Monsanto or one of its subsidiaries.

The highest court in the US, The US Supreme Court just happens to have a former Monsanto Attorney sitting on its bench.

I am probably being redundant, as I have mentioned this before, but we need to be reminded – Justice Thomas was a former Monsanto Corporate Attorney! I am not accusing Justice Thomas of anything – but just knowing that someone worked for the company that produced so much Agent Orange before and during the Vietnam War (and possibly afterward as well) is now a US Supreme Court Justice just does not sit well with me.

The list certainly goes on and on. Look at the FDA, look at Monsanto. Please see the Documentary The World According to Monsanto and more will be revealed to each of you.

I came across some very interesting articles and Websites during the past few days regarding Monsanto, its products, and how it continues to destroy human lives as well as our environment. But most important, how Monsanto continues to get away with it.

True, they have been convicted of lying about their labeling practices for their Round-Up Product – and were fined a pittance compared with their annual (or weekly, for that matter) revenue.

Yes, their stock was affected. But are they staring at a potential bankruptcy proceeding as a result? Absolutely not! They just continue to produce, and in many cases, forcibly sell, their products for a huge profit margin.

I cannot set aside what Monsanto caused, and never will set aside what they continue to cause as a result of Agent Orange. But here is another example: Aspartame was made by Monsanto. To make matters worse, Aspartame is made from genetically manufactured bacteria. (see: Who Makes Aspartame?… That’s Right, MONSANTO!)

What makes no sense, other than the fact that Monsanto wants to dominate the world’s food supply and possibly the world itself, is how they sue, beat up, bully, etc., etc., the small farmers (larger ones as well) to ensure their genetically manufactured products are being used – and said use reaping a very large royalty for Monsanto.

Hiding the presence of PCB’s from local residents? See how Monsanto did it for years – about 40 years to be exact! Suicides in India, and probably elsewhere because Monsanto has forced poor farmers to go into such huge debt just to buy seeds from this terror of a company, just to realize that their crop production was not close to what was being promised! (see: Monsanto Atrocities – Read and Take Action Raw Earth Living)

All this and more, from the folks who brought us Agent Orange – then refused to pay the proper compensation for its ongoing treachery and deaths. Sure, they were part of the infamous 1984 settlement in the amount of $180 million – with most affected veterans who were tricked and lied to – receiving a one-time lump sum payment of $1,200.

Monsanto continues to make huge sums of money and at the expense of human life. How and why do they continue? The bottom line, cash, greenbacks, MONEY! And I dare say – the revolving door.

About the author

Chuck Palazzo is a Marine Corps Vietnam Veteran, the Interim Editor for Agent Orange, and a longtime Vietnam Veterans Against the War Member. Chuck Palazzo has spent years since the war studying the impacts and effects of Agent Orange, a defoliant chemical sprayed by the U.S. govt. on the jungles of Vietnam. He says Dioxins have been re-discovered to cause all sorts of damage to humans. These include Heart Disease, Parkinsonism, Diabetes etcetera. Dioxins are already known to produce serious birth defects and a variety of cancers. The chemical is still sold in Third World Countries and causing the same problems.

http://www.salem-news.com/articles/february212010/monsanto_cp.php

Lu Wang, M.D., Ph.D., of Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, and colleagues studied 19,220 U.S. women age 39 or older who had a body mass index (BMI) in the range classified as normal (18.5 to 25). On an initial questionnaire, participants reported how many alcoholic beverages they typically drank per day. A total of 7,346 (38.2 percent) reported drinking no alcohol; 6,312 (32.8 percent) drank less than 5 grams; 3,865 (20.1 percent) drank 5 to less than 15 grams; 1,129 (5.9 percent) drank 15 to less than 30 grams; and 568 (3 percent) drank 30 grams per day or more.

Over an average of 13 years of follow-up, women on average gained weight progressively. Women who did not drink alcohol at all gained the most weight, with weight gain decreasing as alcohol intake increased. A total of 7,942 (41.3 percent) women who initially had normal weight become overweight or obese (BMI of 25 or higher), including 732 (3.8 percent) who become obese (BMI of 30 or higher). Compared with women who did not drink at all, those who consumed some but less than 40 grams per day of alcohol were less likely to become overweight or obese. Women who drank 15 to less than 30 grams per day had the lowest risk, which was almost 30 percent lower than that of non-drinkers.

“An inverse association between alcohol intake and risk of becoming overweight or obese was noted for all four types of alcoholic beverages [red wine, white wine, beer and liquor], with the strongest association found for red wine and a weak yet significant association for white wine after multivariate adjustment,” the authors write.

The authors caution that, given potential medical and psychosocial problems related to drinking alcohol, its beneficial and adverse effects for each individual must be considered before making any recommendation about its use. “Further investigations are warranted to elucidate the role of alcohol intake and alcohol metabolism in energy balance and to identify behavioral, physiological and genetic factors that may modify the alcohol effects,” they conclude.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/181886.php

Regular use of pain-relief medicine appears to increase men’s risk of hearing loss, especially among middle-aged men, according to an American Journal of Medicine study. Researchers surveyed nearly 27,000 men every two years from 1986 to 2004; about one-fourth of the men said they had been diagnosed with hearing loss. Men who used pain relievers at least twice a week were more likely than non-users to be diagnosed. Aspirin users were 12% more likely, those on ibuprofen-like drugs were 21% more likely and users of acetaminophen, 22% more likely. Men from 45 to 50 years old at the start of the study faced the greatest risk—a 33% increase for aspirin, 61% for ibuprofen and 99% for acetaminophen. Previous nonhuman research has found some substances in pain-relievers can decrease blood flow to the cochlea, the part of the inner ear that converts waves sound into brain signals.
A study finds a link between pain-reliever use and risk of hearing loss.

Caveat: Participants were health professionals (dentists, veterinarians, etc.) and predominantly Caucasian, so the findings may not apply to other demographics. Though the researchers controlled for a wide variety of factors, an unidentified underlying condition could be responsible for the connection.

Read the Study: Analgesic Use and the Risk of Hearing Loss in Men

Alcohol and Weight Gain: Women who drink moderate amounts of alcohol appear less likely over time to become overweight than nondrinkers, according to a study in the Archives of Internal Medicine. The researchers examined data on 19,220 healthy, normal-weight middle-aged women enrolled in a study of the effects of vitamin E and aspirin on heart disease and cancer. At the start of the study, the women estimated how much beer, wine and liquor they typically drank. After 13 years, about 41% of the women had become overweight or obese. Women who said they drank alcohol moderately, no matter what kind, gained significantly less weight on average—even after the researchers controlled for factors such as smoking, diet and physical activity. Women who drank 15 to 30 grams of alcohol per day (roughly one to two shots of liquor or cans of beer) were 30% less likely than nondrinkers to become overweight. The authors suggest several potential, unconfirmed explanations. One possibility: Unlike men, women burn more calories breaking down alcohol than an alcoholic drink contains.

Caveat: Few heavy drinkers were enrolled in the study. Previous studies on alcohol consumption and weight gain have produced mixed results.Subjects in the study were predominantly Caucasian, so results may not apply to women of other ethnicities.

Read the Study: Alcohol Consumption, Weight Gain, and Risk of Becoming Overweight in Middle-aged and Older Women

Sleep Duration: Too few or too many hours of sleep at night may promote abdominal fat accumulation, according to a study in Sleep. Earlier studies have found that high abdominal fat is among the strongest predictors of cardiovascular disease and diabetes. Researchers in this study used CT scans to measure the amount of fat beneath the abdominal skin and around the abdominal organs of more than 1,000 African-American and Hispanic-American adults at both ends of a five-year interval. Subjects were asked whether they typically slept five hours or fewer, six to seven hours or eight-plus hours per night. Participants younger than 40 in the low-sleep group gained the most abdominal fat, followed by those in the high-sleep group and then those in the middle group. Subjects who slept the least consumed the most calories and exercised less, which could explain the greater fat gains.

Caveat: There was no correlation between sleep and abdominal fat gain among subjects older than 40. The study examined only length, not quality, of sleep. Weight gain could have caused the subjects to sleep more or less than usual, rather than the sleep pattern causing fat accumulation.

Read the Study: Sleep Duration and Five-Year Abdominal Fat Accumulation in a Minority Cohort: The IRAS Family Study

Honesty: Low lighting increases dishonest and self-interested behavior even when it doesn’t provide anonymity, according to a study in Psychological Science. In one experiment, researchers randomly assigned 84 college students to perform a math-based task in either a brightly or dimly lit room. The students earned more money the better they did, but they were allowed to score themselves. Though both groups performed equally well on the test, students in the darker room gave themselves scores nearly 50% higher than students in the control group. In another experiment, students divided cash between themselves and an online partner much less fairly if they performed the task while wearing sunglasses instead of clear glasses.

Caveat: Because the subjects were all college students, it’s unclear whether darkness has the same effects on older or younger people. It’s also unknown whether low lighting would have a similar effect without the cash incentives.

Read the Study: Good Lamps Are the Best Police: Darkness Increases Dishonesty and Self-Interested Behavior

Diabetes: Boosting levels of the hormone leptin instead of insulin in diabetic mice improved blood-sugar regulation without increasing body fat, according to a study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Insulin injections have long been the primary treatment for Type 1 diabetes. But the treatment has considerable drawbacks, including weight gain and a higher risk for cardiovascular disease. In this study, Type 1 diabetic mice treated with leptin for 12 days improved their glucose metabolism as much as those treated with insulin, and much more than mice on a placebo treatment. But while mice in the insulin group gained weight, primarily in body fat, mice in the leptin group lost both.

Caveat: It’s unclear whether leptin’s advantages over insulin are short-term or would continue throughout a patient’s life. Few studies have examined the effects of leptin treatment on human diabetics—and among only a very small subset of patients.

Read the Study: Leptin monotherapy in insulin-deficient Type I diabetes

Back Pain: Cognitive behavioral therapy led to sustained relief of lower-back pain, according to a study in Lancet. The researchers randomized 701 British patients into two groups. All patients received 15 minutes of advice about how to manage their lower-back pain—for instance, by avoiding excessive bed rest and using pain medication appropriately. But one group was also enrolled in six sessions of group cognitive behavioral therapy, led by trained therapists, that was meant to enhance compliance with the advice. One year after enrolling in the study, 59% of the subjects who participated in group therapy said their condition had improved, compared with just 31% of the advice-only group.

Caveat: Participants’ levels of pain and disability were judged by survey only, rather than by physiological or biological tests.

Read the Study: Group cognitive behavioural treatment for low-back pain in primary care: a randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis

Sun Exposure: People whose jobs provide little exposure to sunlight may face a greater risk of kidney cancer, according to a study in Cancer. Previous studies have found that ultraviolet light exposure, likely by increasing production of vitamin D, reduces the risk of several cancers, including breast and prostate cancers and lymphoma. In this study, researchers compared the job histories of 1,079 Europeans with renal cell carcinoma—the most common form of kidney cancer—to otherwise similar control subjects. Using these data, they estimated how long the subjects had been exposed to the sun in their careers. Men in the top third for ultraviolet exposure were about 24% less likely to have the carcinoma as were men in the bottom third. Among only men with the highest exposure, there was little association between exposure and kidney cancer, suggesting that while vitamin D deficiency may be the culprit, more-than-sufficient levels confer little extra benefit.

Caveat: The researchers found no such correlation for women, for unknown reasons. The researchers based their estimates solely on occupational history and didn’t collect data about sunscreen use or other factors that could affect overall ultraviolet exposure.

Read the Study: Occupational Sunlight Exposure and Risk of Renal Cell Carcinoma

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704869304575103733101316298.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsTop

One one side some doctors including the American Cancer Society are saying yearly prostate tests can produce false positives. They also cannot distinguish between slow growing cancers and rapidly growing tumors. The side effects of treatment in many elderly men is worse then the slow growing tumor. However on the other hand many doctors say
treatment has led to a 40 percent reduction in prostate cancer deaths since the mid-1990s, according to the National Cancer Institute. When it comes to the documented 40 percent effectiveness of PSA testing in preventing death from prostate cancer, neither the American Cancer Society nor the discoverer of the PSA protein, Richard Ablin, are telling the public the complete story.

“The American Cancer Society is a ‘false prophet’ when it comes to telling the truth about the effectiveness of the PSA test,” said ZERO’s CEO Skip Lockwood. “Dr. Otis Brawley disregards scientific data about the value of the PSA test in saving lives. In fact, his views at a recent medical conference were vigorously challenged by physicians and researchers in attendance.”

“Dr. Brawley seems more concerned about sex than saving lives. He’s obsessed with the side effects of treatment rather than a solution for saving lives. He wants you to trust him instead of the 30,000 urologists in the U.S. and gamble you’re not among the thousands of men who die each year with aggressive prostate cancer tumors,” said Lockwood.

Lockwood acknowledges that the PSA test, like the mammogram, is not perfect.

“No one disputes that the PSA test cannot distinguish slow-growing tumors from rapidly growing ones, yet no one disputes that the PSA test is still the best tool available for early diagnosis and prompt treatment for prostate cancer.

“The long-term solution is to discover a new biomarker for prostate cancer without false positives or negatives and one that determines who has a life-threatening disease and who doesn’t.

One of the nation’s leading experts on prostate cancer, Dr. William J. Catalona of Northwestern University, commented, “Although the PSA test is not perfect, it is effective in identifying men at high risk for prostate cancer and for detecting it early.”

The PSA test, the most prevalent method in use today for prostate cancer, has saved thousands of lives. The PSA test and advances in treatment have led to a 40 percent reduction in prostate cancer deaths since the mid-1990s, according to the National Cancer Institute. Because of the PSA test, 90 percent of all prostate cancers are now discovered before they spread outside the gland, according to the American Cancer Society’s own data.

Dr. Patrick C. Walsh, distinguished professor of urology at Johns Hopkins University noted, “Because prostate cancer produces no symptoms until it’s too far advanced to cure, as appropriate, men should have a PSA test and examination. Until an alternative exists, prostate cancer testing is the best option we have to allow men to make an informed decision.”

Despite misleading claims by the ACS, the value of early detection through PSA testing is supported by more than a dozen leading U.S. organizations.

These include the American Urological Association, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Prostate Cancer Foundation, Prostate Cancer Research Institute, Malecare Prostate Cancer Support, Men’s Health Network, National Alliance of State Prostate Cancer Coalitions, Prostate Cancer International, Prostate Conditions Education Council, Prostate Health Education Network, The Prostate Net, Us TOO International Prostate Cancer Education and Support Network, and Women Against Prostate Cancer.

This is not the first time that the ACS has been sharply challenged. Claims that their views are based on “scientific evidence” were disputed as recently as late last year (and more recently, at the 2010 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium held last week).

ACS became embroiled in a firestorm of controversy last October by seeking to change its guidelines that women did not need an annual mammogram until age 50, instead of 40. ACS quickly backed off after an outcry from the public and health and government officials.

“The only difference between the PSA test and mammograms is there aren’t millions of men who will stand up to the claims being peddled by Brawley and the American Cancer Society,” Lockwood said.

Contrary to ACS claims, medical data suggest mammograms and PSA testing are effective. Based on data by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), mammography screening has led to a 15 percent reduction in breast cancer deaths. USPSTF also references an ongoing screening study where early detection (using the PSA test) has so far reduced prostate cancer deaths by 20 percent.

“This concerted agenda by ACS and Mr. Ablin, both in their timing and their message, purposely fails to disclose all of the facts about PSA testing. Mr. Ablin in particular should be pleased that his discovery of PSA has led to a 40 percent reduction in prostate cancer deaths.”

Similarities between breast and prostate cancer data in the U.S. are striking. Each is the most frequently diagnosed noncutaneous cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death for their respective gender. In 2009, new cases of each cancer were at about 194,000. One in six men is struck with prostate cancer annually; for breast cancer, it’s one in eight women.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/182053.php

The decision by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is the first allowing one non-native species, a flying insect resembling a miniature moth, to control the seemingly unstoppable spread of an alien plant.

However, it is likely to cause concern among wildlife lovers because of a long history of human interventions in the natural world ending in failure, and sometimes causing worse problems than the original, as with the cane toad in Australia.

In a public consultation by Defra last year about 20 responses opposed the scheme, though 42 were in favour.

The wildlife minister, Huw Irranca-Davies, said the fast-growing Japanese knotweed was estimated to cost £150m a year to control, and was able to grow through buildings and roads.

Fallopia japonica has also been blamed for flooding, by causing erosion to river banks and clogging up streams with dead plants.

“This project is not only ground-breaking, it offers real hope that we can redress the balance,” said Irranca-Davies.

Experts estimated in 2003 that it would cost £1.5bn to fund a physical clearance campaign for Japanese knotweed.

Laboratory tests were started on pests from Japan which control the knotweed by feeding on sap from its stems, causing the plant to die back.

The tests showed the chosen Aphalara itadori did not eat any other species, including closely related British plants and important crops.

The psyllids – or plant-jumping lice, which grows to only 2-2.5mm – will be released at two sites initially, under close supervision.

If these outdoor trials are a success the trials will be extended to another six sites, none of which Defra will disclose.

The concept is similar to biological pest control practised by some farmers, using predator insects to control crop pests. The non-native predatory beetle Rhizophagus grandis was also released in Britain under licence in the mid-1980s to tackle the invasive alien spruce bark beetle (Dendroctonus micans).

On conservation and wildlife internet forums, opponents of the idea said they feared the impact on other native wildlife, for example species that might start feeding on the psyllids. One blogger compared the risk to the traditional nursery rhyme “I know an old lady who swallowed a fly” in reference to the long pursuit of one animal to destroy another – ending in the lady swallowing a horse: “She’s dead of course.” The Global Invasive Species Programme said that despite a few well-known failures, a third of biological control programmes to tackle pests and weeds were judged successes, and the system was often considered more “permanent, efficient, environmentally sustainable and relatively cheap” than using chemicals or mechanical removal.

“While there are some risks, which still may be considered by some to be unacceptable, biological control is increasingly viewed as being the preferred management strategy for invasive species, wherever possible, and in the case of biological weed control specifically, it has an enviable safety record,” said Sarah Simons, Gisp’s executive director.

Japanese knotweed, which is native to Japan, Taiwan and China, was introduced by botanists into Britain in the 19th century as an ornamental plant. It grows at up to a metre a month, and a fragment of just 0.8 grams can grow into a new plant. Invasive predators have become a global problem and are among the top causes of global species threats and extinctions according to conservation experts.

The Royal Horticultural Society suggests gardeners destroy knotweed using glyphosate-based weed-killers or by digging out the roots and cutting back regrowth, however it warns that the process can take several seasons. Experts stress that uprooted plants must be destroyed carefully to avoid spreading. “Eradication requires steely determination,” says the RHS.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/mar/09/moth-kill-knotweed

“I went up in the air and I came straight down to the ground,” Potter said. “The pain was excruciating.”

Potter, who was diagnosed with osteoporosis at age 48, had been taking the popular osteoporosis drug Fosamax for eight years before breaking her femur.

Fosamax, one in a class of drugs called bisphosphonates, is supposed to make bones stronger, and for many women, it is safe and effective. But now there’s mounting evidence that, for some women, taking these medications for more than five years could cause spontaneous fractures.

“We are seeing people just walking, walking down the steps, patients who are doing low-energy exercise,” said Dr. Kenneth Egol, professor of orthopedic surgery at NYU Langone Medical Center. “Very unusual, the femur is one of the strongest bones in the body.”

Egol said X-rays of some of his patients look more like injuries from car accidents than from an otherwise-minimal fall.

“Over the last 18 months, we are seeing this more frequently,” he said.

Sue Heller, 60, of Castle Rock, Colo., had been on Fosamax for almost 10 years. She broke both of her femur bones.

“I’m sure there are a lot of women who have brittle bones right now that maybe are ready to break, and they’re not aware of it,” said Heller. “And my heart aches for them.”

Sales of the popular drug increased when doctors began prescribing it, not only to women with osteoporosis, but to others who were osteopenic — with reduced bone density that might lead to the disease. Now some doctors worry that staying on the drug for more than five years can cause some women’s bones to become more brittle.

Weighing the Risks

This is not the first time that many doctors have reported an opposite effect for people taking the drug. Fosamax has already been linked to severe musculoskeletal pain, as well as a serious bone-related jaw disease called osteonecrosis.

Also, the Food and Drug Administration asked the manufacturer, Merck, in 2008 to add information about the report of femur fractures.

After 16 months, Merck added patients’ reports of femur fractures to the list of possible side effects included in the drug’s package insert.

Fosamax, one in a class of drugs called bisphosphonates, is supposed to make bones stronger. But now there’s mounting evidence that, for some women, taking these medications for more than five years could cause spontaneous fractures.
(Getty Images)

“It took Merck an entire year to respond,” said ABC News senior health and medical editor Dr. Richard Besser. In small print on the package insert listing possible side effects from the drug, he said, there are “just six words: ‘low energy femoral shaft and subtrochanteric fractures.’”

The FDA has also never made an effort to inform the public or doctors across the country who prescribe bisphosphonates of the possible side effect, said Besser.

Both the FDA and Merck declined ABC News’ request for interviews. The FDA said it is looking into reports of fractures.

“Nothing is more important to Merck than the safety of its medicines,” said a written statement from Merck to ABC News. “A causal association has not been established between long-term bisphosphonate use and subtrochanteric femoral fractures. In clinical studies, FOSAMAX (alendronate sodium) has not been associated with increased fracture risk at any skeletal site. The company currently has several ongoing epidemiological studies to further investigate the issue of subtrochanteric femoral fractures.”

Dr. Joseph Lane, orthopedic trauma surgeon at the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York City, said, “The drug companies have to recognize when there is a problem, they have to be up front with the public. If there’s a concern, they have to voice it and at least give everybody a fair chance to look at this carefully.”

How Much for How Long?

Many studies suggest an overall benefit from taking the medication for women who are at risk for osteoperosis. In fact, bisphosphonates can help to prevent hip and spine fractures, which for many women may lead to death.

“Normally your bone is constantly being remade,” Lane said. “These patients don’t remake their bone and they acquire damage, microdamage, the collagen gets altered and we need to rejuvenate the skeleton.”

In 2008, bisphosphonate sales exceeded $3.5 billion according to data from IMS Health. In 2008, over 37 million prescriptions were written for the osteoporosis medications.

While some physicians use bone density scans to help drive their decisions, doctors generally prescribe them to women who are at an increased risk for either osteoporosis or fractures from osteoporosis they already have. A new tool developed by the World Health Organization can determine the risk of having fractures and can help doctors determine which women with osteoporosis should be treated with medications.

Although bisphosphonates are generally recommended for postmenopausal women, research does not indicate how long women should be on the drug. Many doctors now recommend a five-year limit.

“When they are on it for five, six, seven or eight years, they lost their ability to remodel and regenerate their skeleton,” said Lane. “[A subset of women] are very vulnerable and they will then develop problems of brittle bone.”

Additional time on the medication depends on doctors’ orders, said Besser.

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/WorldNews/osteoporosis-drugs-fosamax-increase-risk-broken-bones-women/story?id=10044066&page=1

In bits and pieces, in Danish and English, from three universities in two hemispheres and the CDC in Atlanta, a picture has begun forming in the past few days that is already startling in its outline: Paul Thorsen, one of the key scientists involved in CDC-backed studies exonerating vaccines as a cause of autism, is under investigation for collecting millions of dollars in bogus “grant” money, misrepresenting himself to his employers and the world and possibly forging the documents that enabled the scam.

Even more astonishing, it appears the CDC and several other major autism research centers have known about this for months and stayed publicly silent, even as the debate over autism and vaccines has reached several decisive moments — and a new decision is expected any day from U.S. vaccine court. The CDC in particular would have a hard time claiming ignorance about the suspected crime — at least three of the forged documents were in the agency’s name, and it helped uncover the fraud last year.

In addition, several current CDC employees including Drs. Diana Schendel, Marshalyn Yeargin-Allsopp and Catherine Rice were affiliated with Thorsen’s now-defunct research group. Age of Autism has obtained Internet-archived pages from the Web site of the North Atlantic Neuro-Epidemiology Alliances (NANEA) that list the members of the “Atlanta autism team” including Schendel, Yeargin-Allsopp and Rice, all of whom have been in leadership positions in the CDC’s autism epidemiology projects. Schendel is described as NANEA’s “coordinator at Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA.” (The CDC did not respond to phone and e-mail requests for comment.)

Meanwhile, Thorsen apparently continues his involvement on an American Psychiatric Association committee that is revising the classification of autism for the next Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders – a change that could affect how the prevalence of the disorder is calculated and its victims compensated and treated. (The APA did not respond to phone and e-mail requests for comment.)

Thorsen’s resume, dated Jan. 22, 2010, remains on the DSM 5 Working Group members page. (View HERE.) He lists himself as “Adjunct Associate Professor, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.” (Calls and e-mails to Drexel seeking confirmation of his status there have gone unanswered.)

There is also an earlier Thorsen resume still available on an APA directory dated Jan. 12, just 10 days earlier, (View HERE) that differs substantially from the Jan. 22 update.  On that earlier resume, Thorsen calls himself “Associate Professor, Department of Epidemiology, Institute of Public Health, University of Aarhus, Denmark, & Professor, Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, USA.”

What happened in 10 days to change Thorsen’s bona fides so substantially – going from apparently tenured positions at two leading autism research universities to a part-time adjunct professorship at another school?

Follow the chronology: On Jan. 22 – the day the new resume is dated – the University of Aarhus issued a statement “to whom it may concern” (View HERE) contradicting key parts of that first resume: “In March 2009, Dr. Thorsen resigned his faculty position at Aarhus University,” the statement said, meaning, obviously, he could not have been an associate professor of epidemiology as he was claiming as late as Jan. 12, 2010. “In the meantime, it has come to the attention of Aarhus University that Dr Thomsen [sic] has continued to act in such a manner as to create the impression that he still retains a connection to Aarhus University after the termination of his employment by the university.” Of course, one way this could have come to its attention was through a resume posted at the American Psychiatric Association in which Thorsen still stated exactly that.

“Furthermore,” the statement said, “it has come to the attention of Aarhus University that Dr Poul Thorsen has held full-time positions at both Emory University and Aarhus University simultaneously. Dr Thorsens [sic] double Full-time employment was unauthorised by Aarhus University, and he engaged in this employment situation despite the express prohibition of Aar- hus University.”
Thorsen’s resume, revised and re-posted the same day as the Aarhus statement, drops the statement that he is a professor at Aarhus AND Emory, now citing only a loose academic affiliation with Drexel. It also now says his affiliation with Aarhus ended in 2008, not, as he had said 10 days earlier, that it existed “from 1998” forward to the present day. And in the update he cuts short his Emory professorship as well, saying he was at the Atlanta school in 2008-2009 (rather than from 2008 through the present). That chronology makes his tenures at Aarhus and Emory consecutive, not concurrent. Unfortunately for Thorsen, that contradicts his own original resume – and Emory contradicts the claim he was still there in 2010. On Feb. 21, 2010, the Danish publication Politiken reported [in translation]: “’He is no longer employed at Emory. He was part time occupied at the department of epidemiological research from 2003 and from April 2008 to June 2009 as full time research professor’ informs assistant vice director at Emory University Sarah E. Goodwin.”

All this, telling though it is in terms of favoring Aarhus’s version of events, is the least of it. The other part of the Aarhus statement said that Thorsen administered a multimillion-dollar grant from the CDC. Without naming him further, Aarhus goes on to state: “Unfortunately, a considerable shortfall in funding at Aarhus University associated with the CDC grant was discovered. In investigating the shortfalls associated with the grant, DASTI and Aarhus University became aware of two alleged CDC funding documents as well as a letter regarding funding commitments allegedly written by Randolph B. Williams of CDC’s Procurement Grants Office which was used to secure advances from Aarhus University. Upon investigation by CDC, a suspicion arose that the documents are forgeries.

“DASTI conducted an internal investigation of the authenticity of the docu- ments and have filed a police report with no specific person named in the fil- ing. A police investigation is ongoing.”

Multiple Danish news sources make clear that the only suspect in any ongoing investigation anywhere is the person who held the administrative post in question and subsequently left the university – Thorsen. By now, given the fact that the CDC’s own investigation turned up the fraud, the agency presumably has had plenty of time to mull the implications. Just last month, well after the CDC had been contacted by Aarhus and determined that documents had been forged in its name, and in the middle of the Lancet’s retraction of a paper on the MMR’s possible role in the autism epidemic, the CDC’s Tom Skinner told the New York Times that the retraction “builds on the overwhelming body of research by the world’s leading scientists that concludes there is no link between M.M.R. vaccine and autism.”

Thorsen, of course, is pre-eminently one of those leading scientists and was a co-author of a New England Journal of Medicine study on the MMR. Thorsen and Aarhus, as we’ve reported for years, made important contributions to some of the most influential autism-vaccine mercury (thimerosal) studies – studies disputed as poorly done and unconvincing by critics that over the years have grown to include the head of a panel mandated by Congress to study the issue. But based on five studies, three of which included Aarhus – and one of which Thorsen co-authored — the U.S. Institute of Medicine concluded in 2004 that “the evidence now favors rejection of a relationship between thimerosal and autism.”

The question becomes, how strong is that evidence now?
–
Dan Olmsted is Editor of Age of Autism. Mark Blaxill is Editor at Large.

http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/03/poul-thorsens-mutating-resume.html

A mysterious problem that causes bee colonies to decline is once again taking its toll on the state’s beekeepers.

The problem known as colony collapse disorder is characterized by a sudden drop in a bee colony’s population and the inexplicable absence of dead bees.

The disorder has no known cure and appears to be cyclical. After several mild years, it has resurfaced with a vengeance, said Eric Mussen, apiculturist with the University of California at Davis

“It never went away, but this year a substantial number of beekeepers got walloped again,” said Mussen, the state’s leading bee expert. “And worse than they had been hit before.”

Although Mussen said it is too early to tell exactly how many bees have been lost, a bee industry official said losses in the state vary from 30% to 80%.

Roger Everett, a Tulare County beekeeper and president of the California State Beekeepers Association, lost 50% of his nearly 6,000 bee colonies.

“And I consider myself lucky,” Everett said. “We thought the worst was over, but for whatever reason, it has reared its ugly head again. It is kind of scary.”

Fortunately for Everett and other beekeepers, the healthy bee colonies that remain are busy pollinating thousands of almond acres.

Each year, about 1 million bee colonies are needed to pollinate the state’s more than 650,000 acres of almonds. About 500,000 colonies are from California; the remainder come from out of state.

And while almond growers have reported some shortages of bees, industry officials said it appears that most growers will have enough bees to pollinate their trees.

“In the areas that I have looked at, the bees are flying strong,” said Dave Baker, director of member relations at Sacramento-based Blue Diamond Growers.

Baker said it is too soon to say whether the decline in bee colonies will have any effect on yield.

At this stage of bloom development, growers also are concerned about the potential for freezing temperatures and continued rain.

Growers already have had to apply fungicides to combat moisture-caused problems such as bloom rot.

“There some growers who are applying their third spray, when normally this time of year they may only make two,” said David Doll, a UC Cooperative Extension farm adviser in Merced.

http://www.fresnobee.com/2010/03/05/1848488/mystery-problem-again-hits-bee.html