Fatty Goose Liver: Not What the Doctor Ordered

A couple weeks ago, I wrote a column for Science News about the apparent link between fast-food diets and fatty liver disease, a serious and potentially lethal condition in people. In this week's column for that magazine, I cover what might be considered its counterpoise—how eating fatty-liver products can induce a serious and potentially lethal condition, at least in the mice being tested. Presumably, humans could face a similar risk.

The fatty-liver comestible at issue: foie gras.

One somewhat reassuring aspect, at least in the United States, people don't tend to consume much foie gras. It's the excessively fatty liver of ducks or geese—often served pureed into a mousse or pâté and then doctored with any of various spices. I say doctored because I'm not a liver aficianado by any means and it would take a lot of doctoring to make it go down.

I used to take 2 hours to eat about 4 ounces of liver as a child, and I only bothered to try because in our household, the only alternative to finishing it was to leave the dinner table and go straight to bed—at 4:30 p.m. Those episodes left a bad taste in my mouth for anything linked to liver.

As I matured, I lost much of the genetically ingrained taste for fatty foods. So, as you might imagine, fatty liver is one of the last foods that would appeal to me.
However, it appeals to plenty of others, especially many who consider themselves gourmands.

A new study by researchers in the United States and Sweden now finds that the process of overfeeding waterfowl to make their livers especially fatty really stresses those livers. And that stress can lead to the development of protein abnormalities—a misfolding of the proteins into hair-like shapes known as amyloids.

In the June 26 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, those researchers now show that when amyloid-rich foie gras is fed to mice, it can seed tissues in the rodents to begin making even more amyloid. The researchers describe this as the fatty-liver-based food "infecting" the animals with a propensity for amyloidosis: life-threatening disease where the affected tissues—which can be liver, heart, or gastrointestinal tract—don't work properly because their proteins' shape is all wrong.

There are plenty of caveats associated with the findings. And I would direct you to read the longer article in Science News to learn more about them. They explain why there is probably little immediate cause for panic, even among most foie gras lovers.

Among the biggest of these: Affected animals were all at high risk for amyloidosis to start with. Among human populations that would match that condition—individuals with tuberculosis and leprosy. When you think about it, the people in the United States most likely to suffer from either of those diseases are indigents. Such individuals are hardly likely to eat, much less overindulge, in foie gras, which typically goes for $6 or more per ounce.

EPA Compresses Press Access

One nice thing about being a reporter is that we usually get rather open access to a range of ordinarily closed venues—from the White House and various Cabinet level agencies, to behind-the-scenes settings at museums, university labs, industrial centers, control rooms in nuclear power plants, even the command center on ice breakers in the Arctic Ocean (yes, I was there, ferried to the deck on a Coast Guard chopper from Barrow, AK).

We also get an opportunity to ask questions—and usually are rewarded with answers—from newsmakers, like the Environmental Protection Agency Administrator, last Thursday. These events are called press conferences even though increasingly, the reporters who take part don't publish in materials that actually run through presses.

June 14th's press conference was a virtual one in every sense of the word. First, EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson wasn't in town, but on a farm in New England, and patched into reporters by phone. The reporters, similarly, didn't go to the event. We just dialed into a conference call to listen to a host of disembodied voices.

What was particularly weird about this one—on the launching of a study to sample air emissions from confined-animal-feeding operations, or CAFOs—was that it started on the dot at 12:15 p.m. EDT and ended 15 minutes later. Johnson was joined by three other individuals, including the Purdue scientist who was leading the study. All said a little to reporters.

Then, they opened the event to questions. But not many.

Each news organization, we learned, would be allowed one question. But not every news organization would get to ask one because after about five, time was up and they ended the press conference.

Mind you, they told us so little during the introduction, that most of the details had to be elicited, bit by bit, during our one-question-per-reporter access. And with time for few questions, little information was exchanged.

I've NEVER attended a news conference that was so brief and conveyed so little data.

Yes, I'm annoyed at the new limits on access to newsmakers. But the big loser is the public. We get to serve as its voice, asking the questions our readers or listeners would like to if they were here.

Of course, we were directed to check the agency's website for more info. But as one might expect, that information was limited and certainly didn't answer my questions. Less than a minute after the press conference ended, I was on the phone to EPA's news office to ask a public-information officer for more details. I was put into his voicemail, and got a call back long after I needed the information.

This isn't an isolated instance. I'd heard of this happening before from colleagues, but has thought they must be exaggerating the brevity of access. Even my husband, a reporter and bureau chief for a major energy publication, has encountered this phenomenon—the excessive truncation of news conferences.

Remember, it's the public that is really losing access here, and in this case to the people that are supposed to be their servants.

I think the real message is that public servants are short-changing we, the people, on service.

Chinese Toothpaste Scare Hits Colgate

Remember the Chinese toothpaste scare that broke 2 weeks ago? At the time, the Food & Drug Administration noted that only off-brand products might carry the toxic tainting with diethylene glycol (DEG). Well, now comes word that products carrying the Colgate name might also be affected.

FDA announced that it had confirmed it had identified "counterfeit" toothpaste, imported from South Africa, carrying the Colgate name. It wasn't made by Colgate, but had been fraudulently labeled as such, according to spokespersons for the company. Colgate doesn't have manufacturing plants in South Africa or import toothpaste from there.

Yesterday, Colgate-Palmolive reported that the misbranded product "has been found in several dollar-type discount stores in four states: New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland. There are indications that this product does not contain fluoride and may contain Diethylene Glycol." Clues that will help recognize these fakes: they're labeled as coming from South Africa and contain misspellings, such as South Afrlca and South African Dental Assoxiation.

DEG, as you may recall, is a solvent commonly used as an anti-freeze. It's poisonous and doesn't belong in anything that makes contact with the mouth. In some developing countries, low-cost DEG is substituted for the more costly glycerin, a popular sweetener used in liquid over-the-counter and prescription-drug products—and now, apparently, in toothpastes as well.

Just a month before the DEG-toothpaste link made news, FDA warned drug manufacturers and health professionals that unscrupulous foreign firms had occasionally been swapping the toxic DEG for glycerin. In one episode last September, in Panama, DEG tainted medicines resulted in 40 deaths.

"Colgate is working closely with the US FDA to help to identify those responsible for the counterfeit product," a company press release announced yesterday. It recommended that consumers who suspect they may have purchased such a fake to call Colgate's toll-free number at (800)-468-6502.

Why Alcohol Might Be Good for Diabetics

Several studies over the years have found that diabetics who regularly drink a little—and we do mean alcohol—tend to live longer and keep their glucose under better control. For instance, I reported in 1999 that "diabetes sufferers who enjoy an occasional libation, compared with those who eschew alcohol, have just half the risk of dying from coronary artery disease. Those
who down a drink a day face only 20 percent of the teetotalers’ heart-disease mortality."

It's perplexed physicians as to why. And posed a dilemma. After all, doctors don't usually want to prescribe alcohol since it's basically empty calories, can addle thinking, and can contribute to the development of alcoholism in some individuals. So, particularly where a mechanism to explain the association remained murky, doctors generally ignored the link.

It may become a little harder to do so, now.

A study published in this month's American Journal of Clinical Nutrition finds that when people were served alcohol with a meal, their bodies more slowly converted the carbohydrates in the meal into blood sugar. And that's a good thing.

Australian researchers at the University of Sydney's Human Nutrition Unit fed a group of 10 men and women "meals"—usually amounting to no more than white bread with margarine or mashed potatoes. Why these carbs? Because ordinarily the body breaks them down into gluocse—blood sugar—so quickly that eating them is not much better than directly downing a teaspoon of table sugar.

However, when alcohol was consumed with the food—or even up to an hour beforehand—the body digested the food into glucose far more slowly. It parsed out the glucose into blood at a nice, steady pace, which is exactly what the doctor wants to see happen. Why? Because spikes in blood sugar can confuse the body's insulin-making machinery, leading to a spike in insulin, which is NOT good for the blood vessels.

Jennie C. Brand-Miller and her colleagues conclude that "under realistic conditions," moderate quantities of beer, wine, or gin—all three of which were tested in amounts equivalent to two predinner drinks—can lower blood-sugar values following a meal by up to 37 percent,. This, of course, is all relative to dining alcoholfree.

"These effects may provide a hitherto unreconized benefit of moderate alcohol consumption for cardiovascular health," the scientists say.

There is a caveat—isn't there always: The test subjects were all lean and healthy, i.e. not diabetic. However, there is the expectation that this may be one way for people who are at least prediabetic to stay that way.

Here's another caveat: In the new study, the scientists administered white wine in one round of the tests. In fact, red wines might have provided an even more robust advantage, based on data I reported 3 years ago. In that story, experiments—admittedly conducted in diabetic rats—showed that even without its alcohol, red wine's constituents could control their blood sugar after a meal as well as nondiabetic animals.

Boys Just Start Out Bigger

Everyone knows why girls generally don't play on boys' football or basketball teams—they're too small to match the competition. But I always thought that any size advantage in males was due to genetic programming that caused them to grow faster and bigger, starting in toddlerhood.

Wrong. Boys start out bigger in the womb and just keep building on that size advantage after birth.

The revelation comes from a paper by Radek Bukowski of the University of Texas Medical Branch and his colleagues at 10 other U.S. medical institutions, not to mention the University of Cambridge, England and Royal College of Surgeons in Dublin, Ireland.

This august group studied fetal growth in nearly 29,000 babies. Even at just 8 to 12 weeks following conception, boys were bigger than girls. The difference was small, which was why it took so many babies to statistically confirm it was something other than a fluke finding.

Boys retained their subtle size advantage through birth, when they weighed in at some 120 grams more, on average, than girls. That's among boys that were conceived the old fashioned way. However, even among those conceived in a test-tube—and these accounted for 3.5 percent of the babies—boys weighed an average of 90 grams more at birth than girls.

Accounting for mom's height, weight, smoking status, or race didn't alter the trend, the researchers report in the May 15 American Journal of Epidemiology.

Antifreeze Doesn't Belong in Toothpastes

Few people would knowingly reach for a tube of Chinese toothpaste—at least in a U.S. supermarket, pharmacy, or big-box store. However, a number of bargain brands are, in fact, Chinese imports. And even that wouldn't necessarily be a problem, except that our Food & Drug Administration inspectors have identified several shipments of these Chinese toothpastes tainted with a poison: diethylene glycol (DEG), also known as diglycol.

On June 1, FDA issued an "import alert" about these products" and announced that: "Out of an abundance of caution," it recommends that consumers pitch out away toothpaste labeled as originating in China.

DEG is an antifreeze and solvent used in many commercial resins, dyes, oils and organic chemicals. It's also a "humectant"—an additive that keeps products moist—for tobacco, cork and glues. Although toxic to animals, including humans, China permits the use of DEG in toothpastes. The United States does not. In some of the imported products tested by FDA, DEG constituted 3 to 4% by weight of the toothpastes. Not all of the products were even labeled as containing DEG.

FDA identified about a dozen different brands of tainted toothpastes—none major name brands. Interestingly, none of the contaminated brands had received an American Dental Association Seal of Acceptance either. This is a designation that ADA deems the labeled product safe and effective.

According to FDA, DEG is commonly used in some developing countries as a cheap substitute for glycerin and propylene glycol. Where it has been used in products such as over-the-counter cough syrups and pain relievers, deaths have resulted.

Bottom line: Sometimes it pays to ante up for a name brand, or at least one with a medical group's seal of approval.

Hot Flash Newsflash III

Women of a certain age, as we like to say, find themselves prone to hot flashes—a sudden flush and drenching sweat. Not only are these episodes uncomfortable and potentially embarrassing, but they can also become a major distraction from any events at hand. Which is why they're not usually welcomed. However, a new study suggests that perhaps they should be in certain breast-cancer survivors—those taking the drug tamoxifen to ward off a cancer recurrence.

Joanne Mortimer of the Moores Cancer Center at the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine led a study that followed 1,551 women. All had survived early-stage breast cancer and were taking part in a Women's Healthy Eating and Living study, which began in 1995. The study was designed to evaluate whether l0w-fat diets that were high in fiber, fruits, and vegetables might help limit the cancer's return. Slightly more than half of the recruits had been prescribed tamoxifen, and more than 75 percent of these women—674, to be exact—experienced hot flashes.

That's not surprising, since hot flashes are a common side effect of breast-cancer treatment, notes Mortimer. However, among tamoxifen users, hot flashes proved a strong predictor that a woman's cancer would not come back, Mortimer's team reported at the American Society of Clinical Oncology meeting, yesterday. Breast cancer returned in roughly 13 percent of the patients who'd experienced hot flashes, but in 21 percent of those who didn't.

These findings held for women at any age, and proved a better predictor of whether cancer would return than how advanced her cancer had been at diagnosis or whether the cancer was estrogen-receptor negative—the type most resistant to therapy with a synthetic hormone, such as tamoxifen.

The Climate of World Environment Day 2007

Hallmark missed this one. It's not even on your calendar, although the United Nations would put it there if it could. We're talking about commemoration of World Environment Day, which celebrates it's 35th anniversary today.

Established by the United Nations General Assembly, it was created to focus world attention for at least 24 hours, each year, on sustainability and environmental stewardship. The host city for focal celebrations rotates each year. Tromsø, Norway, the 2007 venue, lies just north of the Arctic Circle—a fitting site for this year's theme: "Melting Ice—A Hot Topic."

Margaret Chan, the World Health Organization's Director-General, issued a statement—food for thought, if you will—on the subject of health in a changing climate. "Limiting the impact of climate change is about saving lives and livelihoods, as much as it is about protecting the natural environment," she says.

For perspective, she points out that an estimated 60,000 people—most of them in the developing world—die from climate-related natural disasters each year. However, the developed world is not immune. More than 35,000 people died in Europe's 2003 summer heat wave, and countless more lost their homes, jobs, and future as a result of Hurricane Katrina 2 years later.

However, Chan says, "Even these dramatic numbers do not adequately reflect the potential indirect impact of climate change on health. " She points to several global killers—malaria, diarrhea, and malnutrition, for instance—that "are highly sensitive to climatic conditions. . . . Without effective action to mitigate and adapt to climate change, the burden of these conditions will be greater, and they will be more difficult and more costly to control."

Earth's warming climate is already melting icecaps and glaciers. If allowed to continue, such huge releases of pent-up fresh water could submerge coastal areas where millions of people now live. A changing climate also means rains will likely become less predictable and surface moisture will evaporate more quickly. Together, she says, such developments risk seriously limiting "the quality and the quantity of drinking water, and eventually bringing drought."

Chan argues that "there are two things that we can and must do to respond to this challenge": strengthen public health systems, the first line of defence against climate-related health risks, and "remember that prevention is just as important as cure." She's talking here, about what has come to be known as the precautionary principle. Indeed, Chan maintains, "Many of the actions that are necessary to reduce our impact on the global climate can also reduce pollution and save lives now."

What kinds of actions? She recommends moving towards reliance on cleaner energy sources and more sustainable transport systems. I'm guessing this rules out gas-hogging SUVs and airline travel to short-haul destinations where good rail and road infrastructures exist. Americans might also adopt a tactic common in Europe: Walking whereever possible to the market, cinema, and restaurants?

Today's words from Dr. Chan have been offered as a counterpoint to Michael Griffin's at NASA, last week. These two individuals offer a yin and yang of informed discourse on the future of our responsibilities in affecting climate and the potential repercussions of investing in mitigating strategies sooner rather than later.

Coffee Stats

As a tea drinker, I realize I'm in the minority. Most of the world around me—especially in North America—prefers coffee. And I'd have thought, based on consumption trends among my friends and colleagues, that coffee was still the beverage king. So, it was with some surprise that I read some new statistics in an Agriculture Department newsletter, known as Amber Waves. It reports that U.S. coffee consumption in 2005, the most recent year for which data are available, was 24.2 gallons per person—down from a per capita high of 46.4 gallons in 1946.

One likely cause of the post-war downturn, write Jean C. Buzbyand Stephen Haley of USDA's Economic Research Service, "is the increased availability of alternative benverages, particularly soft drinks."

Does Starbucks know this?

NASA on Climate Change

Double-speak? Triple-speak? Spin-speak?

Just what was NASA Administrator Michael Griffin trying to tell us in the National Public Radio interview, today, on Morning Edition?

"I'm aware that global warming exists," he flatly admits to NPR's Steve Inskeep. "I understand that the bulk of scientific evidence accumulated supports the claim that we've had about a 1-degree centigrade rise in temperature over the last century . . . I'm also aware of recent findings that appear to have . . . pretty well nailed down the conclusion that much of that is manmade."

Sounds like he's a believer in the message Al Gore has stumped for over the past 2 years (and eloquently articulated in what became the Academy Award winning film, An Inconvenient Truth).

However, where Gore and the science community have largely concluded global warming is bad for the planet, Griffin waffled on his assessment this morning, saying that "Whether [the current global warming trend] is a long-term concern or not, I can't say."

In fact, Griffin took a fairly strange tack in explaining his position to Inskeep, arguing that "To assume that it [global warming] is a problem is to assume that the state of Earth's climate today is the optimal climate, the best climate that we could have or ever have had . . . "

Interestingly, that's not the assumption I've made--nor have heard anyone else make.

Griffin goes on to charge that it's "a rather arrogant position" for people to accord themselves the right "of deciding that this particular climate that we have right here, today, right now, is the best climate for all other human beings."

The problems I find with that line of reasoning is that

1) no one has said today's climate is the best. Indeed, it probably should be a bit cooler than it is today if human habitability is going to be our yardstick. After all, sea-level rise, due to the current global warming, has already begun encroaching on human settlements, especially on island nations, reducing their terrestrial real estate. Moreover, current average-global-temperature increases are undoubtedly contributing to droughts that are making farming more costly in large parts of the globe, including much of Florida, Arizona, the Plains states, and California. Climate change is also fostering more erratic weather, in many regions changing the onsets of monsoons and their intensities, both of which can also negatively affect farm cycles.

2) humans aren't the only animals of value. People share the globe with zillions of other species--from mighty oaks and algae to such charismatic megafauna as polar bears in the Arctic and penguins in the Antarctic. The latter are already losing their habitat as glaciers and polar ice sheets have begun melting at rates unheard of in recorded history. The greenhouse gases that human activities spew are certainly contributing to the warming cycle that threatens these polar zones with precipitous change, even as our own regions are slowly altering. And

3) recent warming trends have spurred the spread of disease-causing mosquitoes and other pests. No one would argue that fostering the spread of tropical and other diseases would be a global good.

Over the past few years--and especially the past few months--the august Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has issued reports representing the concensus of more than 1,000 of the world's best informed scientists on climate and its impacts. They conclude that human activities are driving up average global temperatures.

Indeed, just last month, IPCC issued a report to policymakers on the likely impacts of current climate trends. It concluded, contrary to many conservative pundits, that a synthesis of the accumulating data show dire impacts are likely to begin soon. Not only will corals, which play an integral role in ocean health, bleaching--a sign of stress and vulnerability to sickness, but wildfire risks are going to skyrocket. Sickness and death rates in human populations are predicted to soon rise due to those emerging diseases, inability to deal with heat waves or unusual flooding and droughts. Grain yields will suffer will fall at low latitudes but climb a bit at higher ones. Unfortunately, the soils at higher latitudes are often not suitable for grains.

Overall, it says to expect major disruptions to agriculture, falling freshwater supplies, and increased risk of sickness and death from communicable diseases.

Why is Griffin waffling on whether this is a long-term concern? Because some of the prediction may not happen?

I'm betting Griffin buys life, fire, and homeowner's insurance. Why isn't he willing to acknowledge that the planet may need some insurance policies too?

Could it be politics? Can the fate of the globe afford to rest on politics instead of science?

This is truly food for thought...

Food Security Stat

One of the Agriculture Department's 5-year goals has been to reduce the prevalence of very low food security among low-income households (those having incomes at 130 percent of the nation's poverty line or lower) to no more than 7.4 percent by this year. A new report, released today, suggests that achieving that goal will be next to impossible.

In 2005, the most recent year for which data are available, "the prevalence of very low food security among low-income households stood at 12.6 percent, up from 10.9 percent in 2000."

USDA defines very low food security as being where: "at times during the year, food intake of one or more household members is reduced and normal eating patterns disrupted because the household lacks sufficient money and other resources for food."

Source: Nord, M. 2007. Characteristics of Low-Income Households With Very Low Food Security: An Analysis of the USDA GPRA Food Security Indicator. USDA Economic Research Service Report #EIB-25 (May) Available at: http://
www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib25

Fish Stat

"Aquaculture is the fastest growing segment of world food production, accounting for 43% of seafood consumed globally. This $63 billion global industry will play a crucial role in coming years due to increased demand for seafood."

Source: May 30, 2007, Seafood Choices Newsletter, produced by SeaWeb. Available at: http://www.seafoodchoices.org/secure/newsletter-afishianado.php

Cancerous Vacations?

The development of dark moles—known as melanocytic nevi—are the best predictor of whether an individual will eventually contract melanoma, the most deadly form of skin cancer. Sun exposure is the primary environmental cause of those melanocytic nevi. A new study now finds that among 2,189 German children between the ages of 6 and 7, nevi counts correlated best with a history of vacationing in a sunny locale with a high solar-ultraviolet-light index.

The higher the UV index, the higher the melanocytic nevi count, Olaf Gefeller of the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany, and his coworkers report in the May 15 American Journal of Epidemiology.

Where might one encounter a high UV index? At southerly locations, such as Mediterranean beaches. At high altitudes, such as alpine ski resorts. Or in even mid-latitude cities during the height of summer.

In contrast to many other studies, total sun exposure alone did not prove a good predictor of nevi risk. For instance, exposures at home didn't raise risks, not did vacation exposures at northern, sunny sites. The findings suggest, the researchers conclude, that "exposure to intense intermittent doses of UV radiation induced by frequent vacations early in life shows a strong association with [large mole] development."

In the past, history of severe childhood sunburns has proven a somewhat useful risk factor for malignant melanoma. However, teasing out the importance of other sun exposures has proven more difficult, the researchers note. The new study's large size and the children's common hometown made it fairly easy for the researchers to attribute differences in nevi development to difference in vacation sites.

The message these data really bring home is the importance of slathering a child with sunscreen if intense sun exposures—even relatively brief ones—are expected.

Freetopia...Charitopia's Younger Sister

Google Freetopia and you'll get 2290 listings--at least as of today. This past week, the Stanford University team behind Charitopia launched a new sister website that will also be known as Freetopia.

Explains co-developer Michael Genesereth, the new site is "for people who wanted to offer goods to others for free. Just like eBay, but restricted to items offered for free."

Good luck finding it, however. As of today, the new website's URL (http://www.freetopia.org) will just direct you to the Stanford Logic Group, the computer scientists' general-research home page.

More on Charitopia

A few days ago, I reported the unveiling of Charitopia, a website developed by Stanford University computer scientists that matches up donors of goods and charitable groups that could use those cast-offs. At the time I noted that details were sketchy. Well, Charitopia developer Michael Genesereth has since gotten back to me with some details.

As I suspected, the new program is currently operating only around the San Francisco Bay area, largely because arranging for the movement of "free" goods becomes problematic when the donor is in Chicago and the charity in Atlanta. However, he fully expects the program to eventually go international.

For now, Genesereth explains, "We try to match by zipcode. Getting goods transferred remains a problem even in this case. At any rate, it is the charity that is responsible for 'arranging' the exchange. In some cases, this means picking goods up. In some cases, it means asking donors to drop things off. We are also working with organizations like the UPS to do free pickup and delivery; however, we do not yet have any such deals signed. Finally, we are contemplating a volunteer service--to drive around on weekends to pick up and drop things off. Not yet in place either. This is a summer project for some students here."

Although Charitopia went live in March, as of last Friday, only 10 donors and charitable recipients had registered with the project's website (http://www.charitopia.org).

By the way, in just the last 4 days, that site has vastly expanded its utility. For instance, individuals no longer have to register and log in (which is, of course, free) to see what is available or what categories of goods it's currently soliciting.

Or, which charities have signed up. As of today, there are eight: AidsfreeAfrica; Belle Haven School; Budding Ballerinas; Charitopia; Freetopia; Gomoa Achiase School; Habitat for Humanity; and Stanford Logic Group.

However, things are moving along swiftly, Genesereth says. Later this week, he says, "We expect to have the system in full service, including email notifications of complementary listings and so forth."

Speaking of Freetopia, what's that? See the next post.

Flame Retardant Gulls

Last evening, I cited research indicating that people may acquire much of their daily exposure to brominated flame retardants—ubiquitous and potentially toxic chemicals used to render many plastics, fabrics, and other materials resistant to burning—from the air in our homes. Well, today's post points out that wildlife also accumulate these chemicals, byproducts of humanity's love affair with plastics and foam-based goods.

The new paper, published Tuesday online—and slated to appear soon in a print edition of Environmental Science & Technology, reports Canadian research on fetal exposures to herring gulls (Larus argentatus) living around each of the Great Lakes. Not only did eggs of the birds contain anywhere from around 185 to 400 parts per billion (ppb) of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), but they also carried low-ppb concentrations of other types of brominated flame retardants as well.

Many of these are agents that manufacturers have been turning to now that two of the three major classes of PBDEs have been phased out in the United States and Europe. These replacements for PBDEs include chemicals with long, intimidating names, such as hexabromobenzene, pentabromoethylbenzene, and hexabromocyclododecane.

Lewis T. Gauthier of Environment Canada in Ottawa and his colleagues argue that since mother gulls are depositing these chemicals into their eggs, these newer non-PBDE flame retardants must taint the birds' freshwater prey.

What makes the findings potentially troubling: Almost no toxicity data exist for these non-PBDE flame retardants, despite the fact that they are starting to show up in measurable amounts in wildlife.

Flame Retardant Air?

A fairly ubiquitous class of flame retardants—chemicals used to keep products from readily burning—have been showing up in the environment, in animals, and in ourselves. Studies are just beginning to tease out the potential toxicity of one of the more prominent classes of these agents: They're PBDEs, an acronym which stands for a chemical mouthful—polybrominated diphenyl ethers. A new study now reports data suggesting that roughly one-fifth of the exposure of urban residents may come from the air in their homes.

Isn't that a pleasant thought.

Joseph G. Allen of the Boston University School of Public Health and his coworkers installed air-sampling devices in the bedrooms and main living rooms for each of 20 local volunteers. The devices ran for a week whenever the individuals were at home. The researchers also fitted each recruit with a personal air sampler that traveled with him or her around the home. Its intake was clipped to the recruits' shirt collars so that it would sniff the air at roughly nose level. At bedtime, the personal air sniffer was placed at bed height in the bedroom.

What's rather disturbing: The personal air sniffers picked up significantly more PBDEs than did devices just randomly sampling room air. For instance, the average concentration of these chemicals sniffed in the vicinity of the volunteers' heads was ~765 picograms per cubic meter in air—some 300 pg/m³ higher than in bedroom- or living-room air. The findings appear in a paper published online today and due to appear in print soon in Environmental Science & Technology.

The good news: Measured concentrations were low. However, these pollutants are remarkably persistent, meaning they don't readily degrade. So, there's a distinct possibility that exposures could accumulate, leading to a slow buildup of some of these compounds. What there is no question about is that these compounds do make it into our bodies in measurable quantities. Four years ago, university scientists in this country reported that human exposures begin in the womb and is augmented by breastmilk. That's troubling because studies have suggested that at least of few of these PBDEs can trigger subtle toxicity.

Presumably, the relatively high personal readings reflect individuals spending time in close proximity to household items treated with PBDEs. These might include sofas, mattresses, computer cases, electronics, or any of many other products. However, in this study, Allen's team was unable to correlate air readings with the presence of particular products in the tested homes.

Concern over the potential health effects of these agents led to a U.S. phase-out in the production and sale of two of the three common classes of them. The voluntary move by the manufacturers came after discussions with—and presumably more than a little pressure by—the Environmental Protection Agency. At the time, Europe had already instituted a ban on these chemicals. Together, these two classes comprise nearly 200 different PBDEs, although a few particular ones dominate each mix.

The third class, represented primarily by the deca-brominated PBDE, which is known as PBDE-209, remains in commercial use throughout the United States. In the new study, offgassing vapors of all three PBDE classes were detected in indoor air and by the personal-air sniffers (although concentrations of the deca-PBDE were second highest, on average, of the 12 individual PBDEs assayed).

What's the health significance of the new findings? No one knows. However, one recent study reported that fat cells exposed to brominated flame retardants undergo changes that would appear to foster obesity and type 2 diabetes. Another study showed that sunlight can break down some of these flame retardants into unusual members of the dioxin family. And European scientists, working with lab animals, linked PBDE exposures to reproductive and brain problems.

And what the new study reinforces is that our homes are not necessarily havens from these pollutants.

Recycling Charitably

Charitopia. I guess what the Stanford University researchers had in mind when they named their website was some vision of a utopia for charitable giving. It's actually a site that matches up individuals having things to donate—from an unopened box of pencils to a car—with charities that can use them. There's no charge for the matchmaking service, either to donors or recipients. The site's developers also promise no advertising or spam.

A news release that went out to reporters, today, recommends the site for students finishing their school year and at wits end what to do with that chair, TV, and bookcase—items that worked well in the dorm but won't fit in the car to go home. Now, instead of pitching unwanted goods on the street, they can be matched up with hospitals, homeless shelters, or schools.

According to Michael Genesereth and Michael Kassoff, the scientists who designed the program, the site's matching abilities depend on the application of a branch of computer science that endows those number crunchers with reasoning skills. Both donors and would-be recipients identify what they have or want, based on descriptions of the goods in terms that both people and computers can understand. Then, the computer applies logical rules to pair up donors and charities. Donors can even select the type of charity they do or don't want to receive their items.

The project receives no outside funding beyond the Stanford computer-science department, and legal services for the site have been "secured" pro bono by Genesereth, who is research director of Stanford's Center for Computers and Law.

I tried contacting the Charitopia people earlier today to find out if their project has a national reach yet, or just works with parties in California. I've yet to hear back, and the website doesn't offer a clue.

Clearly, even though the site went live in March, the project is a work in progress. Today's news release notes that the Stanford team has hired a summer intern to manually update and increase the classifications for goods that can be listed with the site.

It certainly seems like a good idea. As the parent of a college student, I know how much stuff these young adults acquire over the course of 8 to 9 months—far more than our car can retrieve. Which is why I want to know: Is this service available in Pittsburgh yet?

A Less Fattening Fat?

Few people have trouble losing weight—especially over the short run. The problem is keeping the shed pounds from returning. A new study suggests that substituting 5 grams per day of gamma-linolenic acid (GLA), an essential fatty acid, for an equivalent amount of olive oil can limit how many pounds are regained in the first years following a major paring down of weight.

Marie A. Schirmer and Stephen D. Phinney of the University of California, Davis, recruited 50 formerly obese people to take part in a year-long, double-blind trial. That means that neither the researchers nor the participants knew which half of the volunteers were receiving olive oil capsules and which were getting capsules of GLA-rich borage oil. The recruits were also encouraged to log food intake and exercise daily.

Periodically, the researchers weighed each volunteer, calculated his or her body's lean-to-fat ratio, and looked at how the supplemented fat was distributing itself into body fat.

In the May Journal of Nutrition, the nutrition scientists report that men and women randomly assigned to receive the GLA gained, on average, 2.17 kilograms (4.8 lbs), during the first year on the supplements. Those who had instead been taking the olive oil capsules gained more—8.78 kg (more than 19 lbs.).

The researchers then selected 12 subjects in each group to continue on for another year and 9 months. In this case, all openly received the GLA capsules. At the end of this phase, each group had gained back even a little more weight, although now at the same rate. The researchers conclude that GLA, a polyunsaturated fat, may help people limit the speed and overall amount of weight regained by formerly obese individuals.

Protein Helps Curb Hunger

All things being equal, diets higher in protein are better at holding hunger at bay than meals richer in fat or carbs. That's the finding of a set of prolonged feeding trials run by scientists at Purdue University.

John W. Apolzan and his coworkers advertised for volunteers in the local newspapers and ended up enrolling 12 men between the ages of 21 and 43 and another 10 between the ages of 63 and 79. After calculating how many calories it would take for each man to maintain his current weight, the researchers tailored diets to deliver just that much energy to each man over the course of three 18-day cycles. All foods except for water were supplied the participants, and any uneaten food was returned and weighed.

The recommended intake of protein is 0.8 gram per kilogram of bodyweight—or about 2 ounces for a 155 pound man. In one cycle, each man got slightly more than that: 1 g of protein per kilogram of bodyweight per day. In the other cycles, he got 0.5 or 0.75 g/kg day. The ordering of these 18-day dietary cycles were randomly assigned to each participant. At the end of each cycle, the scientists administered hourly questionaires throughout the waking hours of one day to assess hunger and desire to eat in each of the volunteers.

In the May Journal of Nutrition, Apolzan's group reports that the men reported being 20 percent less hungry after the highest protein diet phase than after either of the others. Similarly, each man's desire to eat was, on average, almost 30 percent greater on the mid-level protein diet and 50 percent greater on the low-protein diet than when the volunteers got the high-protein fare.

It now appears that for those of us wishing to curb the siren call of calories, eating too little protein—as 15 to 40 percent of older Americans do—might foster overeating.

Not Enough Time to Cook

There has been the expectation that as income falls, the amount of time a family spends cooking will climb--in part to economize but also because less time employed outside the home leaves individuals more time to cook. However, contrary to patterns seen in the past, it now appears that low-income U.S. families spend very little time preparing meals.

Indeed, a study issued this week reports that low-income families don't allocate nearly as much time to food preparation as would be necessary to implement the Thrifty Food Plan, an Agriculture Department program which shows Food Stamp recipients how to prepare nutritious meals using low-cost foods available under the Food Stamp program.

Preparing meals from scratch that comply with recommendations of the Thrifty Food Plan take an estimated 80 to 130 minutes, on average, per day. In fact, the new study finds, low-income families where all adults work full-time typically reserve only 40 minutes per day for meal preparation.

Studies by the boatload have shown that people tend to down healthier fare when they eat at home. Moreover, meals cooked from scratch tend to have more nutrients, fewer preservatives, less salt, less sugar, and less fat than foods that have been commercially processed.

In their new report, "Who Has Time to Cook?", Lisa Mancino and Constance Newman of the Agriculture Department's Economic Research Service sifted through data collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Census Bureau on how individuals use their time throughout the day. For this analysis, they focused, of course, on time spent cooking.

As might be expected, women who don't work outside the home--people who in the past might have been termed housewives--spent the most time in the kitchen. On average, they devoted slightly more than 70 minutes a day preparing meals. Women who worked part-time outside the home averaged about 55 minutes a day fixing meals, and full-time working women spent a mere 38 to 46 minutes a day cooking.

Single women found less incentive to cook. On average, those that worked spent 15 fewer minutes per day cooking than those who were married or lived with partners. Perhaps surprisingly, single non-working women spent a half-hour less cooking food per day than those who were married or otherwise partnered.

What about men? Fuhgeddaboudit, as my New York relatives would say. Regardless of income level, those with full- or part-time jobs spent 13 to 17 minutes a day cooking; those who were unemployed spent a mere half-hour or less, on average.

The bottom line, Mancino and Newman say, is that the Thrifty Food Plan doesn't account for how little time people now find available for meal preparation. To offer useful guidance, this Plan will need significant a retooling, they argue, finding recipes for alternatives that can be whipped up in far less time.

As a woman who typically spends 11 to 14 hours outside the home at work and in commuting, I can attest that even when the larder is well-stocked, I have little enthusiasm for spending an hour or more preparing dinner. Except on weekends, even breakfast is prepared on the fly.

Indeed, I'm convinced that too little time and motivation to cook has become one major fallout of our overextended workforce. A correllary, those of us who don't have the energy to cook are also unlikely to possess the energy to exercise in what little free time they can find.

It's not even that we're all doing this just to chase the almight buck. Many jobs require long hours--and exist great distances from where the workforce is likely to live. When will society decide to value quality of life? Once we're all fat and sick? Oops...we're already there, aren't we?

Killer Stats II

Last Friday, I reported on lethal trends, mostly in disease, affecting people around the globe. Tonight, I ran across a paper with an interesting chart that compares all causes of mortality in Americans. Heart diseases ranked first, accounting for 27 percent of U.S. deaths. Number 2: cancer, at 23 percent.

Those chart toppers probably come as little surprise. What may raise an eyebrow or two: chronic lower respiratory diseases (#4 on the list) kill 6% of people each year, and accidents (#5) kill nearly 5% more. The next two most frequent causes of death: diabetes at 3% and Alzheimer's at 2.8%. Murder, #15 on the list, accounts for 17,360 deaths, or 0.7 percent, a value just slightly behind the 18,000 lives lost to Parkinson disease. The latter is especially troubling because there is little information on what causes most cases of Parkinson disease--and still no cure.

Source: Jemal, A., et al. 2007. Cancer Statistics, 2007. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 57(January/February):43.

Hot Flash Newsflash II

Even people who don't cotton to tofu usually find soy nuts palatable. The hard, toasted seeds taste sort of like a cross between peanuts and pretzels. It now turns out that as snacks go, these may have an extra benefit--at least for women experiencing menopausal symptoms. Eating a handful of soy nuts at various times throughout the day cut the number of hot flashes they experienced by at least 40 percent.

The study recruited 60 heathy postmenopausal Boston-area women to take part in a pair of eight-week dietary sequences. In one, they ate a low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet rich in calcium and fish. In the other sequence, they ate this diet supplemented with a half-cup of soy nuts each day, with the "nuts" to be spread out in three or four portions several hours apart. Half started on the diet without soy nuts, the rest on the soy-supplemented one.

In addition to experiencing fewer hot-flash episodes while they were in the soy-nut phase of the trial, the recruits also reported fewer other physical and emotional symptoms of menopause. Francine K. Welty and her colleagues at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston report their team's findings in the April Journal of Women's Health.

The amount of soy and its consumption throughout the day were each intended to mimic, in part, the typical day-long intake of soy in many Asian cultures, where the prevalence of hot flashes is low. Indeed, Welty's group notes, an estimated 10 to 25 percent of Chinese and Indonesian women typically experience this menopausal symptom compared to some 60 to 90 percent of women in Western countries.

I happened onto this paper while I was taking advantage of a nice offer by the publisher of this journal. In honor of National Women’s Health Week, last week, it opened access to the contents of this issue and any other issue of the journal at no cost--but only through June 15. To do so, log in to http://www.liebertonline.com/jwh.

Stunted Stats

The World Health Organization has just crunched data collected from national surveys in 139 countries to gauge the costs of poor nutrition across the globe. One set of statistics is especially disturbing. It shows that throughout the developing world, malnutrition has stunted the growth of one-third of the 179 million children there under age 5.

However, stunting rates vary widely by geography. WHO found that in 39 countries, the rate of stunting in children 5 and under was 40 percent. Among these nations, 22 are in Africa, seven in Southeast Asia, four each are in the eastern Mediterranean and west Pacific, and a single country each are in Europe and in the Americas.

Source: World Health Statistics 2007, released May 18, by the World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, p. 13.

Endangered Species Stats

Mention endangered species, and most people think of pandas, black-footed ferrets, or whooping cranes. However, as of March 19, the largest number of endangered species in the Unied States were plants. In all, 598 of them, mostly flowering species, were formally listed as endangered, compared to just 412 animals.

Among animals, families with the most species endangered with extinction: birds with 76 , fish with 74, mammals with 69, and clams with 62.

Source: 2007. Endangered Species Bulletin, 2006 Highlights edition(May):56.

West Nile Hammers Birds

Spread by mosquitoes, the West Nile virus has sickened more than 23,000 people in the United States since its introduction around 1999, killing more than 930 of them. Indeed, most news accounts of the disease's rapid spread have focused on West Nile's infection risk to people. However, birds have also proved highly vulnerable, as a new study indicates.

Walter D. Koenig of the University of California Berkeley and his colleagues charted changes in the breeding populations of birds throughout California between two counting seasons—the mid-1990s and the 2004-05 season. The latter period was selected because it is the first year that West Nile virus had been detected throughout the state.

The federally organized North American Breeding Bird Survey collects population data each year at the height of a species' breeding season. Such data were used for the new study only when the same person was responsible for bird counts in both periods, owing to large individual variations in counting techniques and reliability.

The scientists also pored over data on West Nile virus testing of 13,000 dead birds in the year leading up to the later breeding-bird census. The researchers restricted their estimates of West Nile's likely influence to just the breeding populations of the 29 passerines—perching birds or songbirds—for which virus prevalence information existed. Birds in this collection included the raven and crow, American goldfinch, song and house sparrows, barn swallow, robin, Western bluebird, and northern mockingbird.

In the just published March EcoHealth, the researchers report finding that species that had the highest virus prevalence rates, based on dead-bird testing, also experienced the greatest population declines between the two survey periods. The correlations proved especially strong for four species: the American crow, yellow-billed magpie, Western scrub jay and Steller's jay. When the researchers examined breeding-population data for these species in the 10 years leading up to the latest census, they saw no similar trend. In other words, it emerged only in the 2004-05 season, when the virus became widespread throughout California.

Other species also appeared to show some West Nile losses, but not to the same extent as these resident—nonmigratory—species. One bird that appeared fairly resistant to the virus: the raven.

Koenig's team concludes that West Nile infections have "had significant negative impacts on avian populations at a large geographic scale."

Who's Fattest Stats

The World Health Organization has just published a list ranking 36 nations in order of the share of their populations that have a normal bodyweight. Any guess where the United States falls? Third from the bottom, at 35.13 percent. The rest of Americans had a body mass index--a ratio determined by accounting for an individual's height and weight--above what's considered healthy.

Only Kuwait and the United Kingdom were fatter than the United States. Wealthy Saudia Arabia didn't rank much higher. It has ony 7% more healthy-weight individuals than we do.

Topping the healthy-weight list was the Lao People's Democratic Republic at 77.14 percent, followed by Ghana (72.4%), the Phillippines (69.51%), Japan (68.9%), the Republic of Korea (68.7%), India (62.5%), and Kyrgyzstan (61.25%).

Somewhere in the middle, all with about 50 to 54% of their populations at a healthy weight, were Colombia, Belgium, Sweden, Italy, and Finland.

Of course, it's not a complete list. There are some 200 countries. However, it says something fairly disappointing for America that Morocco, Estonia, Malaysia, and Kyrgyzstan have almost twice the proportion of healthy-weight adults that we and several other wealthy and powerful nations do. Obviously, it suggests a lot about how we spend out wealth--avoiding exercise in our automobiles and chowing down on low-cost fast food.

Source: World Health Organization Global Database on Body Mass Index (http://www.who.int/bmi/index.jsp), which was updated as of May 18, 2007.

Hot Flash Newsflash

A recent report in the Journal of Women's Health suggests a way to limit the risk of developing hot flashes during menopause that is definitely not what the doctor ordered: Spend your 30s as a couch potato.

Brian W. Whitcomb and his colleagues at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, in Baltimore, suspected physical activity might limit menopausal symptoms, including the often embarassing and always-miserable hot flashes. So, they administered detailed questionnaires to 512 menopausal women, querying them on their activities between the ages of 35 and 40.

The disappointing findings: highly active women were 70 percent more likely to have experienced moderate to severe hot flashes, and 80 percent more likely to suffer hot flashes daily, than were women who had remained largely inactive.

With the epidemic of obesity ravaging populations worldwide, physicians increasingly implore their patients to eat only as much needed to sate hunger--and to exercise regularly. Because regular exercise also helps cut risks of many chronic diseases, from heart problems to diabetes, the researchers caution that "our study results should not serve as an admonishment against regular participation but rather contribute information to the understanding of hot flashes."

The data appear in the journal's January issue. Normally, papers in this journal are available only to subscribers. However, in support of National Women’s Health Week, last week, the publisher is offering free online access to all issues of this peer-reviewed publication through June 15. To see this paper or any other in the journal, go to: http://www.liebertonline.com/jwh.

Whooping Cranes Redux

North America's tallest birds--whooping cranes (Grus americana)--are also among the rarest. The only remaining natural population of the endangered birds summers in Canada, then migrates some 2,400 miles to winter on the coast of Texas. The 237 whoopers that returned to their wintering grounds for the 2006-07 season were the largest number in a century, and 17 more than a year before, according to Tom Stehn and Wendy Brown of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Their report appears in that agency's just-published 2006 Highlights edition of the Endangered Species Bulletin.

In 1941, a mere 41 members of the species remained, largely due to habitat destruction, shooting, and other human activities. With the help of substantial federal protection in both Canada and the United States, the birds have been making a slow but steady rebound. The population grew to 100 by 1986 and reached 200 in 2004.

The species' 2006-07 winter tally reflects a record 49 chicks that reached fledging stage, last summer; all but four of these made it to Texas. In contrast, the year before, just 30 chicks arrived in the wintering grounds. Another record, the Bulletin notes: seven adult pairs made it to Texas with twin chicks in tow. Ordinarily, a female lays two eggs, only one of which survives through its first migration.

This past winter, five whooping cranes were also sighted at a New Mexico wildlife refuge, marking only the second time members of the species were seen wintering outside of Texas.

Nearly 5 feet tall, whoopers are majestic animals. Despite their growing numbers, the wild population's future remains anything but assured. The birds reproduce slowly and inhabit just a few nesting and wintering sites. As such, Stehn and Brown warn, "a single catastrophic event could eliminate the wild, self-sustaining . . . population." And we would all be the poorer for that.

Killer Stats

Today, cancer and heart disease are neck-and-neck leaders as the top causes of death throughout the world. Each claims about 8 million lives annually. Although infections and stroke used to kill roughly equal numbers of people each year at the turn of the millennium, their trajectories are veering in very different directions, with stroke rates climbing slowly and infectious diseases other than HIV/AIDS plummeting dramatically.

If the projections indicated by the World Health Organization data hold true through 2030, the fastest climbing disease killer will be HIV/AIDS. Its death toll in 2002 was 2.8 million people. By 2030, WHO projects mortality from this infectious disease will more than double--to 6.5 million. That wouldn't put it far behind stroke, which is projected to claim about 7 million lives a year by then. Both will still be well behind heart disease at more than 9 million deaths a year and cancer at more than 11 million annually.

One of the saddest stats: WHO projects that tobacco related deaths will reach reach about 8.3 million a year by 2030, which would account for about 10 percent of all deaths globally.

Source: World Health Statistics 2007, released May 18, by the World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, p. 12.

Promising Diet Pill—Not!

A Chinese weight-loss concoction, known simply as NT, has shown promising results in animal tests. Not only have growing rodents gained less weight, but adults actually slimmed some. Subsequent U.S. tests of the herbal combo confirmed those findings—again in rodents. However, when U.S. obesity researchers gave NT to overweight people in a pilot test, a major side effect emerged: diarrhea.

In hopes of overcoming that problem--which traced to natural laxatives in the herbal preparation--the latter research team reformulated the diet preparation. Then, they fed it to 105 healthy people, 18 to 65 years old, for what was to be 24 weeks. One-third got a low-dose mix, another third got double that dose, and a final third got inactive, look-alike pills, termed a placebo. Good news, at the end of 8 weeks: No diarrhea in either treatment group. Bad news: No weight loss, either.

“In fact, the high dose gave less weight loss than the placebo,” Andrew T. Roberts of the Pennington Biomedical Research Center in Baton Rouge, La., and his colleagues report in the March Journal of Medicinal Food. So disappointing were the results that the scientists terminated their study immediately, 16 weeks early.

NT consists of ~40% rhubarb root-and-stem extract, ~26 percent tumeric (Curcuma longae), ~13% red-sage root (Salvia miltiorrhizae), ~13 percent astragulus root, and ~7% dried ginger (Zingiberis officinalis). When the Roberts’ group realized that these natural products also contained gallic acid, a food constituent that has its own weight-loss properties, they decided to make this the primary ingredient in their newly reformulated test preparation. For their test combo, NT became only 20 percent of the total, by weight, with gallic acid making up the remainder.

The team attributes the likely downfall of the new preparation to its reliance on gallic acid. The researchers found that no matter what they did in attempting to augment its absorption, the compound's concentration in blood never exceeded 20 percent of the administered dose—and a max of 10 micromolar concentrations.

Roberts’ team concludes: “GA will not be an effective oral supplement for the treatment of human obesity.”

Garlic as Antibiotic

Studies have shown that raw garlic has the ability to kill many bacterial germs. A group of researchers from the United Arab Emirates now report that the bulb's juice contains at least some of the constituents responsible. However, boiling that juice for 10 to 30 minutes—such as to pasteurize it—partially or completely eliminates its antibacterial effect, depending on the germ against which it's deployed.

Even boiling the juice for just 5 minutes roughly halved its germ-killing prowess, the researchers report in the March Journal of Medicinal Food.

Storing the juice—even at temperatures approaching freezing (i.e. 4 °C)—can also significantly diminish its antibiotic properties.

The authors conclude that “in order to obtain optimum [germicidal] results, garlic juice should be used fresh, and during cooking it is advisable not to expose garlic to boiling for more than 5 minutes.”

What about just using minced garlic? That’s what a Turkish research team investigated, and their findings appear in a second report in the same journal.

Ali Aydin of Istanbul University Faculty of Veterinary Medicine mixed freshly chopped garlic into ground beef and uncooked Ciğ Kőfte, a type of meatball containing bulgar wheat. Then, the researchers refrigerated some samples and left others at room temperature for up to 2 days.

Adding the garlic to ground beef slowed somewhat the growth of germs. However, it didn’t kill them or even halt their growth. For yet unexplained reasons, the garlic proved more effective in the meatballs. At 10% garlic, by weight, bacterial growth in the kőfte was 13 percent lower at room temperature than in the untreated, similarly unrefrigerated raw meatballs. The difference between refrigerated samples was even smaller.

The 10% garlic treatment was the most effective concentration tested—but so high, the researchers admit, as to risk dramatically altering a food's taste.

Their hope had been a way to reduce the risk of food poisoning in regions where refrigeration is iffy or where street vendors hold meat for long periods prior to cooking. However, the scientists concluded, minced garlic’s “antimicrobial effect, even for the highest . . . concentration, is not satisfactory from a practical point of view.”

Bottom line: Garlic is no substitute for keeping meat refrigerated until ready to cook, and your hands and work surfaces clean.

Food Spending Stats

The average family of four spends nearly $9,000 a year on food.

That's based on federal surveys in 2004--the most recent year for which data are available--showing that the average annual per person spending on food in America was $2,207. Of that total, roughly $1,350 per person was spent for meals consumed at home, another $860 for food eaten in restaurants or elsewhere.

Spending varied substantially by income and family status. For instance, single moms spent some $1,600 per person on food, while married couples without children spent an average of $2,740 per person to eat each year. People living alone spent more than twice as much on their food each year, per capita, than did families of at least six.

Finally, food costs comprised a larger share of income for the poorest families—about 37 percent of household income compared to just 6.6 percent of income for the wealthiest households.

Source: Blisaard, N. and H. Stewart. 2007. Food Spending in American Households, 2003-04. USDA Economic Research Service, Economic Information Bulletin #23(March). Available at: http://www.ers.usda.gov

Doctoral Stats

•U.S. universities awarded more than 1.35 million research doctorates—Ph.D's—between 1920 and 2000.

•Overall, men received 73%, although women were acquiring 41% annually by the end of that period.

•Some 62 percent of the newly minted doctorates were awarded for research in science and engineering fields. However, from the 1960s on, more education doctorates were awarded than in any other single field.

•Since the 1990s, foreign nationals have been receiving one-in-three Ph.D's from U.S. universities.

•Since 1995, the median age at which people have been attaining their doctorates has been almost 34 years old.

Source: Thurgood, L., MJ. Golladay, and S.T. Hill. 2006. U.S. Doctorates in the 20th Century: A Special Report (NSF 06-319), issued by the National Science Foundation's Division of Science Resources Statistics, Arlington, Va. (June).

Where You Recover From a Heart Attack Matters

It you're unfortunate to suffer a heart attack, pray it's in a city with clean air. That's the message from a pair of epidemiologists at the Harvard School of Public Health. How long you survive upon release from the hospital, and how well you recover, they find, can both be greatly affected by the amount of fine dustlike particles suspended in the air.

Antonella Zenobetti and Joel Schwartz collected Medicare data on 196,000 heart-attack survivors 65 and older who had been discharged from hospitals 1985 and 1999. They resided in 21 U.S. cities that ranged in size from Chicago to Youngstown, Ohio, and spanned the country from Honolulu to New Haven, Conn. The researchers then correlated long-term air-pollution data for each city--throughout the period following each individual's release from the hospital and for years afterward--with that individual's survival and any subsequent heart attacks or hospital admissions for congestive heart failure.

The scientists took into account factors that might affect survival--independent of any effect of pollution--such as age, type of heart attack suffered, the presence of diabetes or any of several other co-existing diseases, and time spent in the hospital during recovery.

In the May Environmental Health Perspectives, the authors note that theirs is the "first long-term study that investigated persons discharged alive following an acute myocardial infarction [heart attack]." The chief finding: survival was significantly diminished by coming home to breathe air polluted with substantial concentrations of particulates. They focused on values for particulates 10 micrometers in diameter or smaller, since these are the ones that are small enough to be inhaled deeply and to lodge in the lungs' tiniest airways--those that transfer oxygen to the bloodstream.

Youth Porn-Viewing Stat

This troubling statistic emerged from a nationally representative telephone survey of 1,500 Internet users 10 to 17 years old: 42% reported having encountered online pornography in the previous year. Only one-third of the youngsters had deliberately sought out the sexually explicit material.

Source: Wolak, J., K. Mitchell, and D. Finkelhor. 2007. Unwanted and Wanted Exposure to Online Pornography in a National Sample of Youth Internet Users. Pediatrics 119(February):247.

Toxic Baby Bibs

When you hear people talk about lead poisoning hazards, one of the first things that comes to mind is peeling paint chips in poorly maintained innercity apartments. Probably the last that would come to mind are vinyl-backed baby bibs. Which is what makes the story in last Friday's Chicago Daily Herald such a stunner.

Reporter Steve Zalusky interviewed a suburban grandma who apparently triggered a major investigation by the Center for Environmental Health, based in Oakland, Calif. Seems the grandmother had heard a news account about an investigation by that group, which had turned up lead in plastic lunch boxes. It caused her to wonder whether just any plastic might be contaminated.

So, she bought a test kit and used on her grandson's baby bib. When it tested positive for the toxic heavy metal, she bought more bibs and tested those as well. All came from a Chinese supplier for Wal-Mart, Zalusky says.

In a new report that the Center for Environmental Health released last week, Caroline Cox, its research director, noted that over the past 6 months, her group had purchased more than 50 brands of vinyl baby bibs and screened them. It then sent 18 that tested positive to an independent lab for further analysis.

The report said that vinyl portions of four "contained significant amounts of lead, above 600 parts per million." Cox explained that her group used that cutoff "because the Consumer Product Safety Commission classifies paints with more than 600 parts per million of lead as 'banned hazardous products.'” One subsequently tested bib from a Wal-Mart brand actually contained a whopping 9,700 parts per million lead.

On May 2, the Oakland Center announced that as a result of legal action it had taken, Wal-Mart will no longer sell the bibs, at least in California. When regulators in Illinois and New York learned of the problem, they negotiated with Wal-Mart for it to cease selling the bibs in their states as well.

However Cox's group found, Wal-Mart was not the only company selling lead-tainted bibs. A few other major companies distributed bibs that also tested positive. For now, the Center for Environmental Health recommends, worried parents should test any vinyl bibs their youngsters are using and substitute non-vinyl versions where lead is found.

The good news: At least this is an avoidable hazard. It's not like powdered lead wafting in open windows of buildings that lack air conditioning--something that Arlene Weiss, a consulting toxicologist with Environmental Medicine, in Westwood, N.J., documented last year.

I interviewed her at the Society of Toxicology meeting in San Diego. In the March 25, 2006 Science News, I note that the federal limit for lead in house dust is 40 micrograms per square foot of swabbed area. I then cited a study that Weiss and her colleagues had published 1 month earlier documenting that this lead limit "can be exceeded on [indoor] surfaces near windows in New York City after only 3 weeks of dust accumulation" from outdoor sources.

The choice there: Keep the windows tightly closed and swelter in the summer heat--or vacuum and damp-wipe all surfaces daily.

Hormonal Fireworks?

Remember the old TV commercial: It's not nice to fool Mother Nature? Well that's what environmental hormones do--fool our bodies, or those of the critters around us, into taking biochemical directions from pollutants. Perchlorate is one such pollutant with a relatively recently recognized hormonal alter ego. A new report finds aquatic animals may encounter dramatic spikes in exposure to perchlorate following pyrotechnic displays.

Perchlorate is an ingredient of many rocket fuels, which is why Air Force bases can become perchlorate-rich environments. The compound also appears to help boost ceremonial rockets--firecrackers--into the sky. Unfortunately, our bodies mistake perchlorate for thyroid hormones. Ands because thyroid hormones play important roles in growth and neural development, exposure to this pollutant has the potential to do some pretty dastardly things.

For instance, I wrote a story for Science News, last August, that showed perchlorate masculinized certain female fish. So dramatic were the impacts that scientists initially mistook affected females for males. Several of these macho moms even displayed male-courtship behavior and produced sperm. Clearly, that was not something Mother Nature had intended. At a minimum, it could jeopardize reproduction in affected populations.

In the new study, researchers measured perchlorate concentrations in an Oklahoma lake over which fireworks were displayed. The scientists sampled the water before and for weeks after July 4 fireworks rained the rocket ingredient into the water. What they found is that concentrations peaked within a day of the pyrotechnic display, then disappeared. However, it could take almost 3 months for the pollutant to vanish.

To understand how it vanished, the scientists took some lake water back to the lab and added perchlorate to it. As long as the water housed its normal complement of aquatic microbes, the pollutant disappeared. It seems these bugs chow down on it--and how quickly they eliminate the perchlorate can depend on water temperature. However, when the researchers sterilized the water--killing its microbes--the perchlorate showed no signs of disappearing. The findings will appear in an upcoming issue of Environmental Science & Technology. Subscribers can see the article early online.

Although most concentrations in the new study were well below a part per billion, in one instance the peak maxxed out at 44 ppb. For perspective, the latter is within the range that perturbed the reproductive development of fish in the story I wrote last year.

I guess we'll just have to hope that our pyrotechnic displays don't coincide with pivotal developmental periods of nearby fish. Oops...aren't there places--like Disney World, for instance--where fireworks occur year-round?

Sleepless Kids Stat

Sleep "is an important but underrecognized component of wellness in children," Columbia University researchers note in a recent supplement to the prestigious journal Pediatrics. That's why it's disturbing that their new nationally representative survey of U.S. children finds that "[a]pproximately 15 million American children are affected by inadequate sleep." Many of these children also had mood disorders--chiefly depression--headaches, and allergies. Moreover, the scientists found, contrary to many smaller studies, this one documented that childhood sleep deprivation "transcends all culture."

Source: Smaldone, A, J.C. Honig, and M.W. Byrne. 2007. Sleepless in America: Inadequate Sleep and Relationships to Health and Well-being of Our Nation's Children. Pediatrics 119, Supplement 1(February):S29.

Swimming in Hormones

Does the idea of drinking or swimming in hormones appeal? Probably not. However, a new report finds that hormones excreted by livestock not only end up in their manure, but also run off into the nation's waterways as rains wash through manure-treated fields.

So what? Hormones are terrifically powerful chemicals, agents designed to be biologically active in trace quantities. Their role: to orchestrate the body's every function, telling each tissue when it's time to turn genes on—or off. Let loose a signal at the wrong time and havoc can ensue. Which is why littering waterways can do a number on fish and other aquatic life.

In the new study, Jeanne Kjær of the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland and her colleagues measured concentrations of estrogens—female sex hormones—running off of fields that had been fertilized with pig manure. Levels of the hormones were in the low nanograms per liter—that's parts per trillion. Remember, though, these chemicals are designed to work at vanishingly tiny concentrations. Indeed, they often exert a stronger effect at low doses than at higher ones.

Measurable amounts of the sex hormones continued to leach off of fertilized fields for up to 3 months, the scientists will report in an upcoming issue of Environmental Science & Technology. Their article was published early online, last Saturday.

Feminization of male fish has been reported in many waters. I've covered those reports plenty myself in stories for Science News. Most of those reports pointed toward estrogens excreted by humans—and released into waters from sewage-treatment plants—as the likely source of any gender-bending effects witnessed in wildlife.

The new data imply that agriculture could be a substantial additional source of such contamination. Indeed, the authors argue, their findings "indicate an urgent need for further research into the risk of estrogen contamination of the aquatic environment" by manure-fertilized fields.

Smoke and Wind

Pass by any major urban office building, these days, and you're likely to see at least a few souls commiserating outside the entrance about their forced eviction from smokefree offices whenever they feel an urge to light up. However, such nicotine addicts may find their lives constrained even more, if regulators get wind of new research published this month in the Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association.

Stanford University scientists wondered whether exiling smokers to the outdoor environment actually contributed substantially to pollution there. So, they set up continuous particle sensors to tally the tiny smoke particles in areas frequented by cigarette and cigar smokers--these were typically parks, outdoor cafes, sidewalks, and restaurant patios.

The bottom line: Sitting or standing downwind of a smoker could fill your breathing space with substantial amounts of smoke. How much? Within 1.5 feet of smokers, one could encounter upwards of 1,000 micrograms per cubic meter in air of fine particles. These are the type that can be inhaled deeply into lungs.

Admittedly, that was a maximum value. More typical ones were 200 to 500 micrograms per cubic meter of air. Still, Neil E. Klepeis and his colleagues report, concentrations at 1.5 feet downwind of an outdoor smoker were comparable to indoor concentrations found in smokers' homes. The big difference: Once an outdoor smoker puts out his or her cigarette, nearby air concentrations plummet to virtually zero. In homes, however, air isn't diluted as effectively as outdoors, so smoke remains aloft within rooms for hours after stubbing out a cigarette.

This is the first peer-reviewed data on systematic measurements of outdoor tobacco smoke. The study's authors conclude: "these data--that outdoor tobacco smoke levels can be substantial under certain conditions--[are] vital to the development of outdoor tobacco-control policy."

Of course, they're only telling us nonsmokers what we have been observing anecdotally: that outdoor air all too often fails to effectively dilute tobacco pollution. I'd say these data should begin discussions about whether even outdoor cafes need to consider offering us--especially patrons with small children--access to truly smokefree zones.

More Fat Stats

Researchers at the Beltsville (Md.) Human Nutrition Research Center have just released data on fat-consumption trends over the past 3 decades, based upon a representative survey of the U.S. population. The good news is that overall fat intake is down--from a high of about 45 percent of calories in the late '70s, to about 37 percent of calories today. However, despite the message that saturated fats tend to be the least healthy, the new data show that even today, more than half of U.S. adults derive 10 to 15 % of their calories from sat fats. Younger adults--those 20 to 50 years old--consumed the highest quantities--on average, more than 100 grams per day among men, and more than 75 grams per day among women.

What's the biggest contributor of fats to the adult diet? Desserts, at 11%, should come as no surprise. However, it turns out that pizza, burritos, and tacos were equally big contributors. Next on the list--above bacon even: regular salad dressings, butter, and margarines.

Source: "Levels and Sources of Fat in the Diets of Adults" by Alanna J. Moshfegh, Joseph D. Goldman and Randy P. LaComb, at the Experimental Biology '07 meeting this week in Washington, D.C.

No Flavor? It's Scents-less

You know how foods taste strange, or indeed, rather flavor-less when you have a head cold? Well, some people are born with a permanent genetic impairment that prevents their nose from ever picking up scents, volatile cues that are critical to experiencing a food's full flavor. Over the past year, Washington, D.C., physician Robert I. Henkin, began homing in on what underlies the problem for most afflicted individuals. Two days ago, the genial neurologist reported his findings--and a partial cure--at the Experimental Biology '07 meeting, in Washington, D.C.

For most of his patients, their scentsless existence traces to a lack of growth factors in nasal mucus. These proteins are needed to support the health of sensory cells in tissue lining the inside of the nose. In their absence, those sensory cells can become impaired or disappear, he noted.

Afflicted individuals can sense that there are odors around, and their general intensity, but can't distinguish between them, Henkin explains. Their taste buds work fine, so they can detect salt, sweet, bitter, and sour. But they'd never discern the difference between a strawberry flavor and straight sugar, because the primary berry essence is a scent.

Once he realized what was missing in the mucus, Henkin's team at the Taste and Smell Clinic began treating people with drugs--generally phosphodiesterase inhibitors--that help the body make adequate amounts of the missing proteins. Months may go by before nasal secretions become anywhere near replete enough to rescue scent-sensing cells. Once they do, his patients suddenly find themselves bathed in a complex world of strange, wondrous, and often enticing odors.

At the meeting, Henkin reported data from the first 25 patients treated. Even with long-term drug therapy, their mucus growth-factor concentrations never reached normal levels, he told me, "but they get close to it." More to the point, these people get to lead richer, safer lives. Indeed, he notes, some patients had become sickened in the past by not detecting the smell of spoiled foods.

After our talk, I tried to imagine a world devoid of the smells of coffee, chocolate, newly mown grass, or a freshly bathed infant. Who would willingly give that up?

Which explains why Henkin's patients tend to stick with their drug therapy, despite the side effects it can bring, such as increased anxiety or a racing heart rate.

Oh, he did mention one additional therapeutic drawback: weight gain. It seems that once his patients wake up the world of smells, the flavors of their foods can seduce them into downing larger portions.

Weighty Stat

An estimated two-thirds of Americans are deemed overweight or obese. How heavy is that? Astoundingly massive, according to molecular physiologist Ronald M. Evans of the Salk Institute. Sum up all of the excess, he says, and you'll find that the U.S. population is "6.5 billion pounds overweight."

Source: Evans' Fritz Lipmann lecture, this morning, at Experimental Biology '07.

Mushrooming Immunity

Worried about a cold or some other infection? Maybe you should stock up on mushrooms.

These fungi can significantly enhance the body's immune response, according to a pair of fascinating talks I sat through today at the Experimental Biology '07 meeting. Although the reported experiments had been conducted in animals, the researchers acknowledged that their work had been prodded by hopes that the same will hold true in humans. And the fungi that proved especially potent in this regard? Those prosaic white buttons that account for 90 percent of the fungi eaten in the United States.

Dayong Wu and his colleagues at USDA's Jean Mayer Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging at Tufts University in Boston described his group's work with young-adult mice. They added a dry powder made from button mushrooms to the rodents' diet for 10 weeks in quantities that amounted to either 2% or 10% of the animals' meals. Other mice got just the unadulterated chow. When later stimulated with a compound that challenges the immune system, mushroom-treated mice had a more robust response. They produced higher amounts of certain immune agents known as cytokines (including some interferon and interleukin molecules and tumor-necrosis-factor alpha).

The finding suggests that for the elderly or others who might have weakened immune systems, one might enlist mushrooms as a dietary agent to shore up the body's defense against infections.

In a second study, Sanhong Yu and her colleagues at Penn State University tested the ability of five mushrooms widely available in U.S. groceries--including crimini and shitake species--to similarly rev up the immune response of activated macrophages. These are a type of white blood cells that are important immune-system players.

All of the fungi proved helpful, Yu reported. But the really big performer? White button mushrooms!

Yu's team then fed these mushrooms as 2% of the diet to mice for a month and showed that when challenged with a synthetic infection, the animals' immune systems again performed more heroically than if they had been dining on mushroom-free chow.

Who knew? Up to now, I'd always thought of mushrooms as more of a garnish for salads than as a health food.

Bittersweet Stat

Fruits are sweet because they're naturally endowed with sugars. Natural sweeteners lace even milk and various vegetable juices. However, most sugar in the diet has been deliberately added, whether it's to sweeten corn flakes or soft drinks. Boys 14 to 18 years old down the most such added sugar--a whopping 142.6 grams per day, FDA scientists reported today.

That's 21 percent of the energy consumed by boys this age. It amounts to some 570 calories per day, and is equivalent to 35.7 teaspoons of table sugar.

Beverages, especially soft drinks, accounted for most of this added dietary sugar.

Source: Kathleen C. Ellwood, et al. of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in College Park, Md., at the Experimental Biology '07 meeting, in Washington, D.C.

Health Promotions?

James O. Hill is president-elect of the American Society of Nutrition and director of human nutrition at the University of Colorado. Today, at his society's annual meeting--part of EB '07--Hill floated an interesting idea: Find ways to reward people for moving toward a healthier weight.

Two-thirds of Americans can afford to lose a little--or a lot--of weight, he noted. Clinics can treat the excessively heavy, but don't do much for the simply pudgy. Moreover, even people who successfully shed extra pounds usually put them back on again in the next few months or years. The trouble, Hill said, was society hasn't really crafted effective positive feedbacks, incentive structures that encourage exercise and discourage overeating. At least no feedbacks that were stronger than our biology's innate craving to eat and avoid labor.

One proposal he offered was to have people rewarded in the workplace for staying healthy, such as at a near-optimum weight. He noted that many jobs had a dress code. That's based only as aesthetics. How much better, he suggested, to link career advancement or bonus pay to maintaining health, not just pressed shirts and shined shoes.

An intriguing idea.

But not one, I suspect, that will win much favor.

I can imagine all sorts of lawsuits from people who suffer genetic conditions that affect weight or other health issues. Or who have jobs that compromise health at the same time they're being threatened with reduced compensation for poor health. And who decides what constitutes health...or even the ideal weight for any individual?

Although I support Hill's basic thesis, I guess I'd prefer to see society work out carrots to promote health by individuals--not a battery of sticks.

Tea Time for Fido?

Excess pounds can contribute to the development of insulin resistance, a prediabetic change, in many people. Obesity triggers changes in dogs that are "nearly identical to that seen in the obese human," notes Samuel Serisier of the Ecole Veterinaire de Nantes (France). However, a commercial dietary supplement derived from green tea can restore much of the insulin sensitivity in such animals, he reported today at Experimental Biology '07. a meeting in Washington, D.C.

Serisier's team recruited 10 volunteers. These obese canines had already developed insulin resistance, a condition where their bodies had begun to ignore the presence of insulin--a hormone needed to shepherd energy into cells.

For 12 weeks, six of the pooches received 80 milligrams of a powdered green-tea extract per kilogram of body weight along with their normal day's food rations. The daily supplement provided the animals a dose of catechins--a class of plant-derived antioxidants--equivalent to what humans would derive from drinking 3 cups of tea. The remaining animals received just their normal chow.

At the end of 3 months, insulin sensitivity had improved by 60 percent in the tea-supplemented dogs, Serisier noted; no change occurred in the unsupplemented animals. Green-tea-catechin supplementation had no impact on weight, food-intake, or body composition (i.e. percent body fat and lean tissue). Treatment was linkeed, however, with a 30 percent drop in serum triglycerides, fatty substances that can contribute to clogged arteries.

The findings would seem to offer a simple treatment to boost the health of pudgy pets. Better still, of course, would be to see that man's and woman's best friends get plenty of exercise and a low-calorie diet until they reach their ideal weight. Not only would that also improve insulin resistance, but also ensure that pet owners get off their duffs for a little extra, much-needed exercise.

Finally, don't attempt to treat your pooch with regular green tea. The brew is rich in caffeine, a compound that can prove lethal to dogs.