Jan 7, 2018 06:25 AM
A common sugar additive might be driving the rise of one of the most aggressive superbugs
http://www.sciencealert.com/common-super...-trehalose
EXCERPT: A sugar additive used in several foods could have helped spread a seriously dangerous superbug around the US, according to a new study. The finger of blame is pointed squarely at the sugar trehalose, found in foods such as nutrition bars and chewing gum. If the findings are confirmed, it's a stark warning that even apparently harmless additives have the potential to cause health issues when introduced to our food supply. In this case, trehalose is being linked with the rise of two strains of the bacterium Clostridium difficile, capable of causing diarrhea, colitis, organ failure, and even death. The swift rise of the antibiotic-resistant bug has become a huge problem for hospitals in recent years, and the timing matches up with the arrival of trehalose....
MORE: http://www.sciencealert.com/common-super...-trehalose
Why Vaping Isn't a 'Gateway' to Smoking
https://www.realclearscience.com/article...oking.html
EXCERPT: As Imre Lakatos so eloquently stated in 1973, “Blind commitment to a theory is not an intellectual virtue: it is an intellectual crime.” Indeed, blind commitment to a bad theory in the public policy realm will have long lasting impacts, negatively affecting the pursuit of improved public health.
That is why it baffles me when otherwise smart researchers remain committed to bad theories. Indeed, the theory that e-cigarette use will lead to cigarette smoking is a bad theory.
Hypotheses based on the gateway effect are rarely supported, and a rudimentary examination of what would be required to show that certain substances are gateways indicate that it’s nearly impossible to do so. What we do know is that some people are going to do risky things – and we can’t always predict the trajectory of the risk behaviors in which they will choose to engage.
There are ways to minimize the initiation of risky behaviors, but prohibiting one product in hopes of decreasing the use of another should not be one of them. At best, doing so directs time and energy away from a better solution. At worst, people who would otherwise benefit from the reduced harm posed by the alleged gateway product – like e-cigarettes – are put at risk of relapsing to a more dangerous product – like their combustible counterparts....
MORE: https://www.realclearscience.com/article...oking.html
http://www.sciencealert.com/common-super...-trehalose
EXCERPT: A sugar additive used in several foods could have helped spread a seriously dangerous superbug around the US, according to a new study. The finger of blame is pointed squarely at the sugar trehalose, found in foods such as nutrition bars and chewing gum. If the findings are confirmed, it's a stark warning that even apparently harmless additives have the potential to cause health issues when introduced to our food supply. In this case, trehalose is being linked with the rise of two strains of the bacterium Clostridium difficile, capable of causing diarrhea, colitis, organ failure, and even death. The swift rise of the antibiotic-resistant bug has become a huge problem for hospitals in recent years, and the timing matches up with the arrival of trehalose....
MORE: http://www.sciencealert.com/common-super...-trehalose
Why Vaping Isn't a 'Gateway' to Smoking
https://www.realclearscience.com/article...oking.html
EXCERPT: As Imre Lakatos so eloquently stated in 1973, “Blind commitment to a theory is not an intellectual virtue: it is an intellectual crime.” Indeed, blind commitment to a bad theory in the public policy realm will have long lasting impacts, negatively affecting the pursuit of improved public health.
That is why it baffles me when otherwise smart researchers remain committed to bad theories. Indeed, the theory that e-cigarette use will lead to cigarette smoking is a bad theory.
Hypotheses based on the gateway effect are rarely supported, and a rudimentary examination of what would be required to show that certain substances are gateways indicate that it’s nearly impossible to do so. What we do know is that some people are going to do risky things – and we can’t always predict the trajectory of the risk behaviors in which they will choose to engage.
There are ways to minimize the initiation of risky behaviors, but prohibiting one product in hopes of decreasing the use of another should not be one of them. At best, doing so directs time and energy away from a better solution. At worst, people who would otherwise benefit from the reduced harm posed by the alleged gateway product – like e-cigarettes – are put at risk of relapsing to a more dangerous product – like their combustible counterparts....
MORE: https://www.realclearscience.com/article...oking.html
