Welcome To Iconocast |
How to add a URL link from your web site to the Iconocast web sites |
|
|
|
What does Iconocast do? We receive health and science press releases from major research institutes, government agencies, and universities hourly on daily basis and we do present them in today.htm page in English and on todays.htm in Spanish. These are articles and press releases that are sent to all publishers regularly. Do we borrow news from other publishers? Yes, we do and so do many other major Internet publishers such as SeattleTimes.com (from almost all publishers), Washingtonpost.com (from all publishers) and CBS News (from WebMD.com and many other websites and blogs). However, contrary to these publishers, Iconocast adds value to the content presented. The new Iconocast technology provides the most accurate updates on important and valuable health and science news. Are past news or articles worth searching? Yes, we believe past articles are still valuable if they are effectively updated. Majority of these articles are truly timeless.
Fresh News Served Daily With Cafe MochaToday's Health, Science, Technology, Personal Finance News(please report bugs and errors: suzanne@liveinfospace.com)July 19, 2008
Since 2004, 159 Court Actions Have Targeted Citizen Journalists for Libel and Other ChargesWhen Christopher Grotke answered a late-night knock on the door, he did not expect to find the deputy sheriff on his doorstep serving notice that he was being sued. Nor was he prepared for the charge: libel. Someone had posted a comment on his citizen-journalism Web site, iBrattleboro.com, stating that a woman in Brattleboro, Vt., was having an extramarital affair. The accused woman then sued Grotke and his Web site co-founder for failing to edit or delete the comment. The blogging community increasingly is subject to lawsuits and threats of legal action running the gamut from subpoenas to cease-and-desist notices. Since blogging became popular in about 2004, there have been 159 civil and criminal court actions involving bloggers, according to the nonprofit Media Law Resource Center (MLRC) in New York. Seven cases have resulted in verdicts against bloggers, with cumulative penalties totaling $18.5 million. Many more legal actions never result in trial. The result? A stifling of free speech in a medium providing more comprehensive and diverse opportunities for commentary than ever before, digital-rights activists, media lawyers, and bloggers say. "There is a chilling effect of a cease-and-desist letter or a legal threat that claims an aspect of a blogger's work could lead to liability, even when those claims are not well grounded," says Kurt Opsahl, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a nonprofit in San Francisco that defends digital rights. Bloggers faced with legal threats often deem it easier to remove potentially offensive content rather than undertake the difficulty and expense of defending themselves, he adds. Abroad, More Than 60 Bloggers ArrestedBloggers face much bigger threats overseas, particularly if they criticize governments or point to human rights abuses. Since 2003, 64 bloggers have been arrested around the world -- with Egypt, China, and Iran initiating more than half of those arrests, according to the World Information Access Report, published last month by the University of Washington. By contrast, the United States has arrested two in that period. Still, online commentators face risks in the United States. "In the developed world, bloggers can be punished through lawsuits," writes Philip Howard, a communications professor at the University of Washington, in an e-mail. The number of lawsuits is growing, says Robert Cox, president of the Media Bloggers Association (MBA), a U.S.-based group devoted to protecting citizen journalists. "As blogging expands and more people are aware of it," he says, "the lawyers are not far behind." No one is suggesting that bloggers should have free rein to publish whatever they want. "If you're slandering, you can be sued whether you have a blog or not," says Cox, a blogger himself. "You're not immune to defamation charges ... just because you're a citizen speaking your mind." Who Should Educate the Bloggers?There is no consensus, however, on how best to make bloggers aware of their legal responsibilities. Many lawyers expect bloggers to figure it out themselves. "If you're going to be responsible enough to manage a site where people post such things, you should be able to detect when things are defamatory and take them down," says Margot Stone, the lawyer for the woman who sued Grotke. "The problem is that technology is outpacing the ethical responsibilities. People haven't thought through the ethics of all this." Online communities as well as media activists and lawyers are pushing to ensure that bloggers are aware of their legal rights and responsibilities. The EFF and the Citizen Media Law Project (CMLP) -- an affiliate of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School -- offer detailed legal guides for bloggers. Both organizations also help bloggers find legal counsel. In addition, the CMLP maintains a database of all legal action directed against bloggers. "That way bloggers know they're not alone," explains David Ardia, director of the CMLP. Other citizen-media groups say more proactive support is needed. Since 2006, the MBA has been working with Media Pro Insurance to create the MBA Media Liability Insurance program. "We're coming up with a product that covers defamation, copyright, privacy violations -- the same protections as newspapers -- for bloggers," says the group's Cox. MBA members will receive a hefty discount on the insurance package, due to be launched at the end of this month. The cheapest coverage for a solo blogger will be $540 a year. But some bloggers resist the idea. "I don't have the money for that kind of thing," says Kathleen Seidel, a New Hampshire-based blogger who was subpoenaed this spring in connection with another lawsuit against vaccine manufacturers that she had written about on her blog. Having written several posts about litigation and completed two legal courses at the local community college, Seidel was able to deflect legal threats against her blog and successfully composed a motion to quash the subpoena. Grotke, too, was able to convince a Vermont court to dismiss libel charges. Many bloggers, however, aren't so fortunate, which is why the online community is searching for ways to protect them. "The effect of intimidation is a real one," Seidel says. New flour means bread could fight obesityBy Richard Gray, Science Correspondent A new type of flour could turn the humble loaf of bread into a weapon against obesity. Researchers at the National Institute for Agricultural Botany in Cambridge have produced a genetically modified form of wheat that releases fewer calories into the body compared to other varieties currently available. Food made from the new crop is also digested slower, making people feel fuller and less likely to eat more food. The scientists hope that these qualities could help make staple foods such as bread, pasta and other flour products healthier. It is part of a growing area of research that is attempting to create new types of low fat and healthier foods in a bid to tackle the growing worldwide obesity crisis. The new wheat has been engineered to produce a form of starch, known as resistance starch, that is harder for the body to break down in the stomach. When the wheat is milled, processed and cooked it retains this resistance to digestion, unlike flour containing normal starch. The scientists will reveal their research on these "super carbohydrates" at a conference today organised by the British Ecological Society. Andy Greenland, director of research at the National Institute for Agricultural Botany, said: "Starch is what gives us the calories in bread as it is made up of long chains of sugar. "Resistance starch has a low glycemic index and so releases the sugars far slower in comparison to normal starch. By accumulating more of this starch in the grain we can produce better calorific release properties, but it may well have beneficial effects on diet related diseases such as coronary heart disease and diabetes." The scientists, who are developing the wheat as part of a three year research project into new starch products, are now planning to test the fat fighting wheat to see if can produce good quality products like bread. They also hope to find ways of creating the new crop without using genetic modification, as GM crops are currently banned from being grown for human consumption in the UK. Mr Greenland added: "We are still in the research stages so these crops are not available on the market yet. At the moment the transgenic route would not be acceptable in the UK, so we would like to find ways of producing it through other methods." Health secretary Alan Johnson last year described the threat posed by obesity in the UK as a "potential crisis on the scale of climate change". Figures released last month revealed that nearly 23 per cent of children in their first year of primary school are now overweight or obese. In the next 20 years 70 per cent of women in the UK and 86 per cent of men will be overweight and the epidemic is expected to cost £45 billion by 2050. Dr Colin Waine, chairman of the National Obesity Forum, said: "This is an extremely appealing idea as it would allow people to eat a balanced diet that is less likely to make them obese. "Food producers do need to look at ways of producing foods that make this easier for people. It could also have a significant impact on people suffering from diabetes." Scientists at Birmingham University have also discovered a new method to replace fat in food products by using a protein found in mushrooms. The protein creates an air filled capsule that mimics the texture of fat. The researchers claim that the protein could be used to replace fat in foods such as salad dressings, mayonnaise, sauces and even ice cream where most of the fat is used to provide a rich texture rather than taste. Dr Phil Cox, one of the researcher on the team, said: "It is hoped that, by making indulgent foods more healthy, the consumer will be able to continue to enjoy those foods that are currently seen as bad for you, without worrying about the fat content."
Q&A: Can you overdose on vitamin D?My doctor has recommended a large daily dose of vitamin D to counteract osteopenia (thinning bones). Is it possible to overdose on the vitamin? —J.S., Orinda, Calif. Yes, but it takes huge doses: at least 10,000 international units (IU) a day for several years. Such amounts can damage the kidneys, bones, and nervous and cardiovascular systems. But reaching them would require a lot of pills or even injections. Most people should consume between 600 and 1,000 IU a day from food or supplements, depending on their age and level of sun exposure. Multivitamins usually supply about 400 IU, enough for most people to reach those levels. But you may need a larger supplement if you are older than 50 or so, heavier, have darker skin, or rarely get out in the sun. If the dose your doctor suggests is higher than the 1,000 IU a day typically recommended to strengthen bones and provide other benefits, ask why you need so much. Read more on the surprising benefits of vitamin D (free) and on how vitamin D can help in the prevention of osteoporosis (subscribers only).
This year the Farnborough airshow celebrates its 60th anniversary, an event which is expected to attract more than 250,000 visitors.
Too much sleep tied to stroke risk in older women Last Updated: 2008-07-18 9:01:22 -0400 (Reuters Health) WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Regularly getting nine hours or more of sleep per night may increase the risk of stroke in postmenopausal women, according to a study published on Thursday. Only 5 percent of the 93,000 women in the study, who were 50 to 79 years old and from 40 locations around the United States, reported getting nine hours or more of sleep nightly.But they had a 60 percent to 70 percent higher risk of stroke compared to women getting seven hours of sleep per night, the most common sleep duration, the researchers wrote in the American Heart Association journal Stroke. The researchers statistically accounted for known risk factors for stroke and still found the increased risk in the longer-sleeping women. "Whether it's because of sleep apnea or because of restless sleep or because of any number of things, we don't know," Sylvia Wassertheil-Smoller of Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York, one of the researchers, said in a telephone interview. "The study definitely does not say that for women who sleep longer, if they decrease their hours of sleep they'll be better off," Wassertheil-Smoller, an epidemiologist, added. The researchers said it is unclear whether the findings would apply to men and younger women.The study, which ran from 1994 to 2005, also saw an increased stroke risk among women who got no more than six hours of sleep a night.But this was a much smaller effect. The researchers said there was a 14-percent higher risk in this group compared to those getting seven hours of sleep. Wassertheil-Smoller noted there are known bad physiological effects from sleep deprivation that might play a role.Previous research into sleep duration and risk of stroke or coronary artery disease provided inconsistent results. The study found that in this group of postmenopausal women, 8 percent reported getting five hours or less sleep a night, 27 percent reported getting six hours, 38 percent reported getting seven hours, and 23 percent reported getting eight hours.Some 4 percent reported getting nine hours and 1 percent reported getting 10 hours or more. Copyright © 2008 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the Reuters group of companies around the world. Antidepressants linked to non-Hodgkin lymphoma Last Updated: 2008-07-18 15:01:20 -0400 (Reuters Health) NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Long-term users of so-called tricyclic antidepressants are at increased risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), new research confirms. "We previously reported an increased incidence of NHL among long-term users of tricyclic antidepressant medication in a population-based cohort of more than 30,000 users of antidepressant medications," Dr. Susanne Oksbjerg Dalton, of the Danish Cancer Society, Copenhagen, and colleagues point out. Another population-based study did not confirm these findings, but "it did suggest a possible excess of NHL with tricyclic antidepressant medication among the long-term users," they also note. In the July issue of Epidemiology, Dalton's group reports an update of their population-based cohort, increasing the sample size to the entire population of 354,551 adults in North Jutland County. Between 1989 and 2003, the researchers compared the incidence of NHL among antidepressant users and nonusers. Of the 43,932 subjects who used any antidepressant medications, 11,958 used tricyclic antidepressants, 22,695 used another type of antidepressant known as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), 4421 used other antidepressants, and 4858 used more than one type. There were 92 cases of NHL and, according to the team, there was a strong association between use of tricyclic antidepressants and NHL. No increased risk of NHL was found in users of other types of antidepressants."Given the high prevalence of antidepressant use, this finding warrants additional studies with sufficient power to investigate risk by type and dosage of antidepressant medication as well as by lymphoma subgroups," the researchers conclude. SOURCE: Epidemiology, July 2008. Copyright © 2008 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the Reuters group of companies around the world. The final verdict on coffee Last Updated: 2008-07-18 13:55:19 -0400 (Reuters Health) TORONTO (Reuters) -- If contradicting research has you wondering if coffee is healthy or harmful, the answer is simple: it depends. A recent study showed a benefit from drinking java on a population level. But it's difficult to make individual recommendations for safe coffee consumption, said Dr. Ahmed El-Sohemy, a University of Toronto associate professor funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research who has studied caffeine and health. El-Sohemy's research has showed that coffee could either lower or raise a person's risk of heart attack. That's because safe daily coffee intake is going to vary with the ability to process caffeine -- and that changes from person to person. There's no easy way to tell how effectively your body deals with caffeine, and therefore how much of it is safe for you to drink, he said. Because individual variations are hard to measure, it's difficult to confidently recommend a safe amount of coffee consumption because what might be dangerous for one person could have no effect on another, El-Sohemy said. That's why numerous studies have associated coffee consumption with both an increased and a decreased risk for many chronic diseases, he said. Even for a single condition like heart disease, the findings have been inconsistent. "You can sense the stimulating effects of caffeine when it binds to receptors in the nervous system," he explained. "You cannot feel how quickly your liver is breaking down caffeine in your body, and there are no other signs or symptoms that tell you whether or not caffeine can trigger a heart attack in you." While the latest study, from the Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, did not prove that coffee is protective, its results strongly suggest that drinking coffee is not harmful to healthy individuals. The researchers looked at thousands of healthy men and women from earlier studies and discovered that in the women, drinking two to three cups of coffee daily was associated with an 18 percent reduction in death from all causes, while four to five cups daily showed a risk reduction of 26 percent. The results in men were smaller and could have been due to chance, but followed similar trends. Accounting for risk factors like weight, diet and smoking, the researchers found that people who drank coffee - caffeinated or decaf - were less likely to die than those who didn't, and their risk reduction could be attributed to a lower risk of dying of heart disease, despite previous studies showing an association between heart disease and caffeine consumption. The Universidad Autonoma de Madrid study involved thousands of individuals - 84,214 women from Harvard Nurse's Health Study and 41,736 men from the companion study following male health professionals. A study of that size, which takes results from previous research and puts everyone into large groups, doesn't take individual variations into account, El-Sohemy said. If the majority of the people in the study happened to be fast metabolizers of caffeine, you'd predict that the results would show a protective effect, and vice versa. The consistent theme across all studies seems to be that when harmful effects like an increased risk of heart attack are associated with coffee, caffeine is the culprit, El-Sohemy said. Coffee naturally contains caffeine - about 100 mg in a single cup. Espresso also has 100 mg, and a grande latte or cappuccino at Starbucks has 150 mg. Coffee is not the only drink with caffeine in it, however. A can of Coke or Diet Coke has 45.6 mg, and a single Red Bull energy drink has 80 mg. Tea can have caffeine as well, El-Sohemy points out - about 50 mg for black tea and 15 mg for green, depending on the blend and how long it's steeped. Even decaf coffee still has a couple milligrams of caffeine in it. The American Heart Association says the existing evidence pertaining to caffeine consumption and increased heart attack risk is conflicting. The AHA says that moderate coffee consumption of one to two cups daily doesn't seem to be harmful. The Heart and Stroke Foundation agrees that moderate consumption is likely safe, but sets that level at two to three daily cups of beverages that contain caffeine, including coffee. In the Universidad Autonoma de Madrid study, the protective effect that was associated with coffee consumption is probably not due to caffeine because a similar outcome was seen in decaf drinkers, El-Sohemy said, noting that the result is consistent with his own research on caffeine consumption. "When it comes to heart attacks, caffeine is probably not a good thing," he said. "It's just that depending on the individual, it may come out as a significant risk or not really because it's countered by some of these other compounds." Those include antioxidants like flavonoids. Foods rich in those compounds - including coffee, tea, dark chocolate, fruits and vegetables - have been associated with a lower risk of many chronic diseases. Antioxidant supplements, however, may not have the same impact, Al-Sohemy pointed out; in fact, some research suggests that supplements may produce an opposite oxidization effect. On the individual level, coffee consumption may be a mix of the good and the bad: positive effects from antioxidants and other compounds, negative effects from caffeine. "We need to really pay attention to individual recommendations," El-Sohemy said. "It's easy to make population-based recommendations, but ultimately the true risk or benefit will depend on the individual." Because there's no easy way to know just who should be avoiding caffeine and who can consume it safely, switching to decaf coffee may be an option for some people who worry about health effects but enjoy their morning cup of joe. "I think that might actually be a prudent thing to do," El-Sohemy said. "And it looks like you may still be preserving some of these other goodies that are in coffee." Copyright © 2008 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the Reuters group of companies around the world. Treating Depression Reduces Risk Of Heart DiseasePatients suffering from major depression are at an increased risk for cardiovascular disease, but treating these patients with medication can greatly reduce the risk, according to new findings by researchers at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine. The results of their study are published in the July 16 issue of the journal PLoS ONE.The researchers specifically studied the stress-hemoconcentration, which is a blood chemistry work-up that includes a blood cell count, hematocrit values, hemoglobin, total serum protein, and albumin. The stress-hemoconcentration increases during psychological stress, such as that caused by depression, and the increase is a risk factor for heart disease. "We studied 146 outpatient depressed patients against controls from the same Mexican-American Los Angeles community," said Ma-Li Wong, M.D., professor and vice chair for translational research in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at the Miller School of Medicine and lead author of the study. "We took blood from all the participants at the start of the trial, and we found increased measures of stress-hemoconcentration in the mild to moderately depressed patients. Basically, when you are stressed out your blood becomes thicker than normal and thickened blood can put you at higher risk for a heart attack or stroke." All of the participants then completed eight weeks of a randomized, double-blind trial of antidepressant treatment with either desipramine or fluoxetine (PROZAC). Blood was drawn from all participants at the end of the eight-week treatment. "After the treatment phase we found the measures of stress-hemoconcentration to be improved and they correlated with an improvement in depression symptoms," said Wong. "Our findings suggest that reducing the stress-hemoconcentration in depressed patients through antidepressant treatment could reduce their risk of cardiovascular disease." The study took place while Dr. Wong and Dr. Julio Licinio were at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA. University of Miami Miller School of Medicine www.med.miami.edu Inovio Biomedical's First Proprietary DNA Vaccine Achieves 100% Protection Against Avian Flu In Pre-Clinical TestingInovio Biomedical Corporation (AMEX:INO), a leader in enabling the development
of DNA vaccines using a proprietary electroporation-based DNA delivery platform,
announced recently pre-clinical results from two proprietary plasmid DNA-based
universal influenza vaccine candidates using the company's proprietary
electroporation delivery technology and, specifically, a new intradermal device.
In this study, 100% of the immunized mice given a lethal challenge of highly
pathogenic H5N1 influenza virus (A/Vietnam/1203/04) survived and showed only
minor weight loss. Modified Virus Used To Treat Prion Disease In MiceA treatment that prolongs survival in mice with prion disease has been found in research led by Dr Giovanna Mallucci at the Medical Research Council Prion Unit at UCL (University College London). Examples of prion diseases include vCJD and kuru in humans and BSE in cows. The results are published in PNAS.Dr Mallucci and colleagues used a harmless form of virus carrying a specific strand of RNA to block production of prion protein in brain cells in mice with prion disease. In prion diseases, a naturally occurring protein in the brain, known as prion protein (PrP), changes its normal shape when it comes into contact with misshapen versions of the same protein 'prions'. These abnormally shaped proteins build up in the brain and are infectious: once they start to accumulate they convert more and more of the normal PrP into the abnormal form, also known as PrPSc. This conversion process is associated with malfunction of brain cells, eventually leading to their death. These changes cause the symptoms of prion disease. Past research at the Prion Unit and elsewhere has shown that normal PrP is a valid therapeutic target for prion disease, because if naturally occurring PrP is absent, prions cannot replicate and the PrPSc form cannot accumulate. Dr Mallucci's group set the scene for this new treatment in the past by showing that mice genetically engineered to stop making normal PrP recovered from prion disease when normal PrP production was switched off in infected mice. Now the team has turned this approach into a treatment that does not depend on genetic changes in the whole animal. They have shown that by using a modified virus expressing a small sequence of RNA (shRNA) that binds to the PrP RNA in brain cells, the production of PrP can be blocked. The virally-expressed shRNA interrupts the normal process of translation of RNA into protein molecules in a process known as RNA interference. The team gave a single one-off injection of the virus into a specific brain region in mice that had early prion infection. Blocking PrP production in this way in mice with established prion disease was found to have two effects. Firstly, the mice given the virus carrying RNA lived on average 19% longer than mice given a virus with no RNA and 24% longer than mice given no treatment at all. Secondly, the treatment prevented the onset of behavioural problems associated with early prion disease, and showed protection against degeneration of brain tissue and the loss of neurones. Commenting on the significance of the finding Dr Mallucci said: ''The results are exciting because they have proved that tackling PrP even in a very focal way is beneficial in prion disease, protecting brain cells and extending survival in this model. Clearly, there is an issue with delivery of such treatments to a much larger organ such as the human brain and we don't know how much brain tissue would need to be targeted. These injections target tiny volumes of brain tissue. Getting the virus to a much larger brain area is a major goal for all gene therapy for neurodegenerative diseases. These results help us to answer other questions using this approach, which may help us to understand how to tackle these diseases with other forms of treatment also. Using this approach we can explore whether there are critical areas to be targeted in prion disease, how much of the brain needs to be targeted and understand the timing of such treatments.'' ''This does not represent a realistic treatment for human patients, but it backs approaches of all types aimed at taking out normal PrP and should help us understand the timing and extent of delivery needed for effective treatments in future,'' Dr Mallucci concluded. Original research paper: Single treatment with RNAi against prion protein rescues early neuronal dysfunction and prolongs survival in mice with prion disease by White et al is published in the journal PNAS. Medical Research Council http://www.mrc.ac.uk Sun lotions give 'one twentieth of the protection they claim'
|
