It’s about time the bees get some good news! A new study finds that sunflower pollen can lower the rates of certain infections in two different kinds of bees, the bumblebee and the European honeybee. The pollen lowered the rates of Crithidia bombi (a particular pathogen) infection in bumble bees (Bombus impatiens) and also reduced another pathogen, Nosema ceranae, of the European honey bee (Apis mellifera). Bumblebees who consumed sunflower pollen also produced more eggs, larvae, and had a higher probability of pupating. Rebecca Irwin is a professor of applied ecology at NC State and one of the senior co-authors of the study.

We’ve tried other monofloral pollens, or pollens coming from one flower, but we seem to have hit the jackpot with sunflower pollen…None of the others we’ve studied have had this consistent positive effect on bumble bee health.”

Bad News for Bees

The bee crisis has been in headlines more than ever lately. Neonicotinoids, a class of pesticides acknowledged as particularly toxic to bees, damage bee’s immune systems, promote disorientation, disrupt gut microbes, and shorten their life cycles. Recent studies have also found that the problem may be more serious than previously thought. Bees can develop a preference for pesticides. These agricultural chemicals are also impairing bees’ ability to remember and learn things.

Recommended: Foods Most Likely to Contain Glyphosate

Benefits of Sunflowers

While sunflower pollen won’t be able to address the harm bees suffer from pesticides, the flower can still provide protection from certain infection.

Sunflower seeds have a plethora of nutrients, especially vitamin E. That might hold the key to sunflower’s ability to help the bees fight off disease. Vitamin E is a great source of antioxidants, has anti-inflammatory properties, contains zinc for the immune system, and have even been shown to fight infections in human infants. A vitamin E deficiency can lead to neurological issues like balance problems and lack of coordination. These neurological problems also sound like things bees experience when they’re repeatedly exposed to sunflower seeds. Could vitamin E, through sunflower seeds, do even more for the bees?

As They Go, So Do We

Bees are crucial to our food supply. Thirty-five percent of the world’s crops depend on pollinators like bees. The bees needed for that are disappearing at a rapid rate. A survey of beekeepers found that 33 percent of their bees died in 2016 and 2017. Our food system depends on them. The discovery of sunflower pollen as a potential support for bees is a step in repairing the massive damage inflicted on these insects.

Recommended: How to Detox From Plastics and Other Endocrine Disruptors

Sources:

• Sunflower Pollen Has Medicinal, Protective Effects on Bees – NC State University
• Medicinal value of sunflower pollen against bee pathogens – Nature.com
• 34 Amazing Benefits Of Sunflower Seeds (Surajmukhi Ke Beej) For Skin, Hair, And Health – Style Craze
• Benefits of Sunflower Seeds – Nuts.com
• Pesticides are making bees dumber – Popular Science

Reuters reports that an international panel of experts has concluded, “Most men shouldn’t get routine prostate cancer screening because the potential benefits are small and there are clear harms.”

The prostate-specific antigen (PSA) blood test is the test used screen for prostate cancer. Experts researched studies with a total of more than 700,000 men and found that if screening reduces prostate cancer deaths at all, it’s negligible. The data indicates that PSA screening risks outweigh the benefits but despite that, the report states that those with a family history of prostate cancer likely still benefit from screening.

Although the results of this study suggest screening is not worthwhile, several guidelines advocate offering screening in some cases.” – Prostate cancer screening with PSA test

Reuters quotes co-author Dr. Philipp Dahm of the University of Minnesota as saying

Most, but not all, well-informed men that fully understand the trade-offs would choose not to undergo screening.”

Only those men who place more value in even a small reduction of prostate cancer mortality – these may be men at higher risk because of a family history or because of African descent, or those simply very concerned about ruling out a cancer diagnosis – may opt for screening. Shared decision-making is needed to help them arrive at a decision consistent with their own values and preferences.”

Chances are, everyone has cancer. Most men with prostate cancer have low-risk tumors that haven’t spread outside the prostate. Cancer screening for prostrates has gotten so good that men are being discovered with extremely low-risk cancers and then being aggressively treated for it with risks that far outweigh the cancer itself.

For the last few years, the media has gone back and forth on whether or not regular prostate screening benefits outweigh the risks. Our position is don’t drink, don’t smoke, keep your gut healthy, and stay away from doctors unless it’s an emergency.

Recommended:

• Myth of Moderate Alcohol Benefits Debunked, and How Science Gets Corrupted
• How To Heal Your Gut

In a unanimous vote, the California State Assembly passed Senate Bill No. 1249, and last Friday Governor Jerry Brown signed the bill into law. The law bans cosmetic products that have been tested on animals or products that include ingredients that have been tested on animals. Thirty-seven other countries have already banned animal testing on cosmetics.

The law will go into effect on January 1st, 2020, and will apply to all cosmetics currently sold in California as well.

Recommended: Foods Most Likely to Contain Glyphosate

The California Cruelty-Free Cosmetics Act was written by Democratic state Senator Cathleen Galgiani. The law stipulates that it is illegal for manufacturers to “import for profit, sell or offer for sale” any cosmetics tested on animals. Huffington Post reports that violations will be punished with a fine of $5,000, followed by an additional $1,000 fine for every day that the violation continues. The law does allow for exceptions in the event that animal testing is required by federal law and there are no viable alternatives. Companies can have testing done for products and ingredients if the product is to be sold in foreign markets where their law requires such testing, and then the company can also sell those same products in California. For example, China requires all imported cosmetic products to be animal tested before sale. The bill states:

Notwithstanding any other law, it is unlawful for a manufacturer to import for profit, sell, or offer for sale in this state, any cosmetic, if the cosmetic was developed or manufactured using an animal test that was conducted or contracted by the manufacturer, or any supplier of the manufacturer, on or after January 1, 2020.”

Related: Pet Store Puppies Cause Multi-State Bacterial Infection

The scientific conclusions is that toxicological tests have advanced enough so that animal testing is no longer relevant. The program manager for animal research issues at the Humane Society of the United States, Vicki Katrinak, told the Huffington Post,

We’re hopeful this law will encourage the federal government to pass the Humane Cosmetics Act,” program manager for animal research issues at the Humane Society of the United States Vicki Katrinak told the Huffington Post.

Rabbits, mice, rats, and guinea pigs are frequently used for cosmetic testing. The process is generally torturous and the animals are often killed after testing.

PETA lists popular cosmetic brands that still perform animal testing. Check out their list of Cosmetic products that test on animals and the brands that don’t.

The more fluoxetine an E.coli microbe is exposed to, the more likely that bacteria is to develop multidrug resistance, says a new study from the University of Queensland in Australia. What is fluoxetine, and why is this a big deal?

Fluoxetine is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) and the active ingredient in some of the world’s most prescribed anti-depressants like Prozac and Sarafem. E.coli bacteria were exposed to fluoxetine for 30 days in different concentrations. The bacteria were then exposed to antibiotics like chloramphenicol, amoxicillin, and tetracycline. The microbes exposed to the fluoxetine showed an increased resistance to antibiotics that was 50 million-fold higher than the experiment control. The more the bacteria were exposed to the SSRI, the more quickly the drug resistance developed. Jianhua Guo is one of the authors of the study.

Fluoxetine is a very persistent and well-documented drug in the wider environment, where strong environmental levels can induce multi-drug resistance…This discovery provides strong evidence that fluoxetine directly causes multi-antibiotic resistance via genetic mutation.”

Related: Sugar Leads to Depression – World’s First Trial Proves Gut and Brain are Linked (Protocol Included)

Ubiquitous Fluoxetine

Fluoxetine is an incredibly popular drug. Healthcare practitioners issued more than 28 million prescriptions for it in 2018. It’s almost always among the top 30 medications prescribed worldwide. It’s everywhere, and the link between the antidepressant and antibiotic-resistant bacteria could have serious consequences.

This study is a lab-based study, and it’s fair to wonder how the drug and the bacteria interact in a real-world scenario. Scientists don’t know. When a drug this popular has the potential to hasten the evolution of multidrug-resistant bacteria though, we need more studies.

In People

Most antidepressants are taken for longer than a year. But even a short period on fluoxetine can give harmful bacteria the time they need to develop resistance. Prozac takes longer to exit the body than other SSRI medications like Paxil or Zoloft. While those examples 99 percent out of the body after 5 and 6 days respectively, Prozac takes nearly a month. These medications “fix” problems by disrupting the endocrine system. A disruption like that allows infections to flourish in the body.

Related: How To Heal the Gut

Not to Be Depressing…

We’re not ready for the level of antibiotic-resistant bacteria developing in our society. We know that antibiotics fed to food animals are a major source of those developments. Yet U.S. farmers are still using antibiotics regarded as “crucial to human health.” The authors of this study found that triclosan, an ingredient in antibacterial soaps, causes antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Now antidepressants have been linked to multidrug resistance.

We aren’t taking confirmed causes of this health seriously, and we are constantly finding new potential causes we hadn’t even considered. It’s a recipe for disaster.

Sources:

• One of The Most Widely Used Antidepressants Has Just Been Implicated in Breeding Antibiotic Resistance – Science Alert
• Antidepressant may cause antibiotic resistance – University of Queensland Australia
• Antidepressant fluoxetine induces multiple antibiotics resistance in Escherichia coli via ROS-mediated mutagenesis – Science Direct
• Fluoxetine Hydrochloride Drug Usage Statistics, United States, 2005 – 2015 – ClinCalc
• Going off antidepressants – Harvard Health Publishing

Memos and emails obtained by Buzzfeed News show the current administration attempting to reverse positive public support of cannabis. In August BuzzFeed News reported on a secretive marijuana committee operated by the White House with the purpose of spreading negative attitudes toward marijuana and portraying the plant as dangerous. Buzzfeed says the Trump administration was evasive when BuzzFeed News attempted to confirm reports on the secretive marijuana committee. But Buzzfeed News now reports that:

…the White House’s Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) has acknowledged the committee’s existence in a letter to a Democratic senator seeking information in light of BuzzFeed News’ report.”

The Marijuana Policy Coordination Committee was reportedly directed to ignore positive health effects and societal benefits of marijuana use. But The Hill reports that the White House denies only seeking negative information on marijuana:

“I assure you that ONDCP seeks all perspectives, positive or negative, when formulating Administration policy. You have my full and firm commitment that ONDCP will be completely objective and dispassionate in collecting all relevant facts and peer-reviewed scientific research on all drugs, including marijuana.” – ONDCP acting Director James Carroll wrote in a letter sent to Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet.

BuzzFeed News reported in August on memos sent to federal agencies seeking only negative information on marijuana. The memos asked for data that shows only “the most significant negative trends” on cannabis. The committee stated in one memo it wanted to reverse the trend of increasing marijuana usage.

Staff believe that if the administration is to turn the tide on increasing marijuana use there is an urgent need to message the facts about the negative impacts of marijuana use, production, and trafficking on national health, safety, and security.” – quoted from comittee meeting summery, posted on Buzzfeed News

The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have released their investigation into a string of multidrug-resistant campylobacter infections that affected 118 people from 2016 to 2018. The cause? Puppies sold at 6 different pet stores across 18 different states.

The first cases of Campylobacter jejuni were identified in Florida. After reviewing the data, scientists linked them to a national pet store chain based in Ohio. At the end of a collaborative investigation between the CDC and local state health departments, where officials from six states collected puppy fecal samples, antibiotic records, and traceback information, 118 people were found to have contracted campylobacter from the pet store puppies. Twenty-nine of the people affected were employees of the 6 pet companies linked to the infections. The specific bacteria isolated in this investigation was traced back to 25 different breeders and 8 distributors of dogs.

Shoddy Practices

Of the 149 puppies investigated for this study, 142 of them had received at least one course of antibiotics. The majority of research into antibiotic-resistance and animals has focused on animals raised for food like cattle and chicken. In fact, the bacteria that caused this infection, Campylobacter jejuni, is one of the most common causes of food poisoning in the U.S. and Europe and most commonly found on raw poultry. But this discovery suggests that the same issue we’re experiencing with factory-farming could be taking place with pets, especially those raised in puppy mills.

Recommended: How To Heal Your Gut

Puppy mills and unscrupulous breeders are notorious for poor living conditions for the animals that live there. Dogs are kept in overcrowded, unsanitary cages for nearly 24 hours a day. The conditions in these frequently unlicensed facilities mirror those in your typical factory farm. This is one of the first studies to suggest that those comparisons extend to potentially dangerous pathogens found at both kinds of farms.

The Future

This outbreak shows another way antibiotics have snuck into our daily life. Antibiotic-resistant bacteria pose one of the most potent threats to public health in the future. Within the next thirty years, these microbes will likely kill more people than cancer. There also aren’t new antibiotics in development. Managing antibiotic resistance through the avoidance of unnecessary antibiotics is more crucial than ever before.

Recommended: After Taking Antibiotics, This Is What You Need To Do To Restore Healthy Intestinal Flora

Sources:

• CDC: Drug-resistant infection in 118 people linked to pet store puppies – Click on Detroit
• Multidrug-Resistant Campylobacter jejuni Outbreak Linked to Puppy Exposure — United States, 2016–2018 – CDC
• About Puppy Mills – The Puppy Mill Project
• WHO Says the World Will Run Out of Antibiotics Able to Treat Bacteria Superbugs – Organic Lifestyle Magazine

A new study now links “safe” levels of Bisphenol-A (BPA) and the development of type-2 diabetes, insulin resistance, and other metabolic disorders. The Food and Drug Administration considers BPA safe at oral exposure levels of 50 micrograms per every kilogram of body weight every day. Published in the Journal of the Endocrine Society, researchers based at the University of Missouri wanted to determine if humans exposed to BPA exhibited the same symptoms as mice. Frederick vom Saal, an endocrinologist at the MU College of Arts and Science and co-author on the study, thinks this study provides a compelling argument that they might.

This exploratory study needs to be replicated because it suggests that BPA exposure at a dose considered safe by U.S. regulators could alter glucose-stimulated insulin responses in humans…Our study is an initial step toward investigating whether exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals, such as BPA, contributes to insulin resistance and eventually Type 2 diabetes.”

Methods

For this study, researchers gave non-diabetic men and postmenopausal women oral doses of the FDA’s safe level of BPA. They also administered a placebo. Those who were given the BPA had altered insulin responses. Those results occurred both when scientists used an oral glucose tolerance test and a hyperglycemic clamp.

Related: How to Detox From Plastics and Other Endocrine Disruptors

Bad News BPA

Most people know BPA is bad, even if they don’t know why it’s bad. In addition to insulin resistance, the chemical has been associated with inflammatory bowel disease, obesity, cancer, and a whole host of hormonal issues. It’s been banned in the majority of children’s products, but the alternatives to BPA aren’t much better. A recently released Washington State University study found that BPA alternatives like bisphenol-S caused genetic abnormalities similar to those caused by the product they’re replacing.

Related: How to Heal the Gut

Even something as simple as a cash register receipt can be a big deal. The BPA found in register receipts is unbounded, meaning it is loose and more readily absorbed through the skin. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency conducted receipts tests in 2014 and found that the thermal paper used in 18 hospitality business had from 54–79 micrograms of BPA per square centimeter of paper. That’s more than the accepted safe oral dose of BPA.

Death By a Thousand Cuts

At this point, it’s plastics. There are several different types of plastic, and not all of them have inspired a cause for concern. Part of that can be attributed to a desire from good enough by plastics manufacturers and government officials. But good enough has so far led to a steady increase in mystery illnesses that linger and seriously impact a person’s quality of life.

Sources:

• BPA exposure in U.S.-approved levels may alter insulin response in non-diabetic adults – MU News Bureau
• Experimental BPA Exposure and Glucose-Stimulated Insulin Response in Adult Men and Women – Oxford Academic
• How to Detox From Plastics and Other Endocrine Disruptors – Organic Lifestyle Magazine
• BPA in thermal paper – Minnesota Pollution Control Agency