Food: is it quite as good as you thought?

Food is everywhere these days. Shelves groan with glossy cookbooks, restaurants and gastropubs queue up for tax breaks, and the airwaves are thick with chirpy kitchen‑dwellers—some dropping their aitches with theatrical enthusiasm, others sounding as if they’ve just strolled out of a rowing club bar. Everywhere you look, there’s another beaming evangelist waving a saucepan and assuring us that their latest ‘blend’ is nothing short of a revelation. One could be forgiven for thinking that food itself has become a national moral project, a jolly good thing in which we are all expected to take an interest.

However the readers of our little blog being a thoughtful lot, we thought we’d put up two stories which might provide a little counter-balance to the general merriment. The first from the indefatigable Kat Lay of the Guardian (clearly she knows about more than just antibiotics) does not suggest food is bad per se. But it does suggest that being extremely careful about what you eat, and who is selling to you might be a very good idea[1] Her headline tells you exactly what we mean: Ultra-processed foods should be treated more like cigarettes than food – study

“OK, OK”. you say, “but wot I eat is my choice, innit, guvnor? If I ain’t doin’ no one else no ‘arm, wosser problem?” Well according to Nature Briefing, Eating Well is about more than your health, this might be:

Debates over what to eat — more protein, say, or less ultra-processed food — often neglect any mention of how our food systems affect the biosphere that keeps us alive. But nutrition doesn’t exist in a vacuum, notes Earth-systems scientist Johan Rockström. He co-chaired the latest update to the Planetary Health Diet, which aims to optimize human health globally and reduce environmental and social harms. It notes that “global greenhouse-gas emissions could be cut by 20% by 2050 by eating healthily, reducing food waste and adopting sustainable production practices”, writes Rockström. “If diets remain unchanged, however, emissions will increase by 33%.”Nature | 7 min read
Reference: The EAT-Lancet Commission on healthy, sustainable, and just food systems report

We want humanity to survive, really we do. If you went extinct there would be no one to man the check out tills at supermarkets and we’d have to use those ghastly check-out-yourself tills that are so slow, complicated and inconvenient. Yeah food is alright, sometimes. But as the old saying goes-be careful what you wish for.

[1]https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2026/feb/03/public-health-ultra-processed-foods-regulation-cigarettes-addiction-nutrition

#food #nutrition #climate change #obesity #health #fat #protein #fast food #processed food

Two new stories give fresh hope on cancer

Two stories give us hope of real progress in understanding and treating cancer. The first from the excellent Emma Gritt of the Mail [1] concerns the work of the great Dr Mariano Barbacid whose work has been so crucial in elucidating and developing the whole theory of oncogenes and the role they play in cancer. His team has been studying the effects of three drugs on the KRAS gene, deeply implicated in the development of the pancreatic form of the disease. But: don’t read us, read Emma-she knows a lot more than we do

The second story, from the inimitable Ian Sample of the Guardian [2] concerns the application of the Google Deep Mind AI tool to study genetic drivers of cancer-and other diseases too. To quote Ian:

“We see AlphaGenome as a tool for understanding what the functional elements in the genome do, which we hope will accelerate our fundamental understanding of the code of life,” Natasha Latysheva, a DeepMind researcher, told a press briefing on the work.

Once again click!. You’ll get a lot more from Ian than you will from us.

Both stories blend into two of our old LSS favourites. Firstly, the use of AI to look at complex biological patterns which humans alone struggle to perceive. (LSS 1 12 20 et seq) Secondly, that repeatable frequencies in DNA may be tied, probabilistically, to repeatable patterns of symptoms. Veteran readers will recall our hopes that this methodology may apply to psychiatric disorders too: (LSS 18 12 25 and 29 12 25). Of course, we expect to learn of environmental and epigenetic factors as well. But if we are right, these genetic advances may provide a firmer starting point for future investigations than we have now. How much more is achieved when facts are sacrosanct, not convenient entities to be selected and disposed according to the immediate convenience of their user! A lesson which certain US politicians and the news channels which so fanatically support them would do well to learn.

[1] Huge pancreatic cancer breakthrough as scientists achieve ‘permanent disappearance’ of disease with new triple-threat approach tested in lab | Daily Mail Online

[2]Google DeepMind launches AI tool to help identify genetic drivers of disease | Genetics | The Guardian

#AI #deep mind #cancer #genes #DNA #medicine #health #oncogenes #psychiatric disorder #heart disease

Can Cancer really save you from Alzheimer’s? Some great research, but also some caveats

Could having cancer really protect you from Alzheimers? For years epidemiologists have noticed that people who have had cancer — especially certain solid tumours — seem to have a reduced statistical risk of developing Alzheimer’s, but the mechanisms have been unclear. Now an exciting mew study suggests a possible explanation. Some cancer cells overproduce a protein called Cystatin C. This enters the brain where it interacts with the amyloid-β plaques which many researchers associate with the development of Alzheimer’s. Now, we can’t do better than put you onto Nature Briefing Why Cancer and Alzheimer’s don’t mix. and their admirable analysis of a paper that originally appeared in then Journal Cell. It contains all the links and primary source matter you will need. But we’ll make a couple of observations( see below); for that is our wont.

Cystatin C, a protein produced by cancer cells, could partially explain why people who have had cancer have a lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease. In a study in mice, researchers found that the protein can infiltrate the brain and bind to the molecules that make up the hallmark brain plaques of Alzheimer’s disease. This interaction draws the attention of immune cells, which then degrade the plaques. If confirmed in humans, the findings could suggest a path toward new therapies for Alzheimer’s, says cancer researcher Jeanne Mandelblatt. Nature | 5 min read
Reference: Cell paper

Firstly the research is obviously tip-top and exciting- regular readers will know our love of an unexpected truth hiding in plain sight . There’s potential here for some really radical treatments for Alzheimer’s and goodness knows what other neurological conditions. However: so far, the work only pertains to mice. That’s usual: but as it scales up to humans, there’s many a slip ‘twixt cup and lip as the old adage would have it. What’s more, the relationship between cancer and Alzheimer’s is complex and multifactorial — immune system changes, metabolic shifts, treatment effects and environmental and epigenetic factors may all have their say. And Cystatin C itself has been implicated in both protective and harmful processes in the brain, depending on context.

And there is a deeper problem which has nothing to do with the earnest efforts of the researchers but everything to do with the less than acute hominins who surround them and who will read about this in popular daily newspapers and in mediabytes on dubious feeds. Ever prone to believe stories rather than weigh evidence some will conclude that “ a cure for Alzheimer’s has been found!” Others will ignore the old warnings of the logic teachers, ever suspicious of over hasty correlation between cause and effect. Yes, this is exciting research, But cautious people will expect no life changing applications any time soon.

#Cystatin C #cancer #alzheimer’s #neurology #brain #health #medicine

Debra MacKenzie on microplastics-and a master class in balanced reporting

So-are all our bodies full of microplastics, ready to reach out their oily hands and strike us all down with heart disease, tumours and goodness knows what else, or not? It’s a story we’ve covered before (LSS 9 4 24) and to be fair we even approached it with a certain moderation (LSS 12 3 25)

But who are we to advise you, when we can point you at once to the works of science journalist Debra Mackenzie, writing in the Guardian? [1] Not only is the science interesting. She also gets to the heart of why scientific controversies arise. In the case of microplastics, because one lot of researchers (medical folk) are approaching the problem one way. And another lot (analytical chemists) come from somewhere different, with other methodologies And this is ominous: as we have seen time and again, with CFCs, with tobacco and with fossil fuels, there could be interested parties who will be waiting to pounce on those disputes , to use them to allege that the science is not certain, that no action is needed. To quote one of the more chilling passages of Debra’s article

The plastics industry is more powerful than the CFC-makers were, and it has friends who know how to manufacture doubt. (Researchers I spoke to said that their papers have been denounced to journal editors by chemical industry figures who were not analytical experts.)

Now we at LSS are not medical experts. gentle readers. We do not know where the truth lies, although we may suspect. And, as in many scientific debates, there may be actors with differing levels of enthusiasm about where the evidence ultimately points. In any case, you should read Mackenzie’s article. You will learn a great deal more than just about plastics..

[1]https://onlinescientias.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=13505&action=edit

#health #pollution #microplastics #science

Autism: How many types?

Readers will recall the ancient controversy over claims that Autism was caused by the MMR vaccine. We didn’t believe those claims much then, and probably even less so now. But amid all the shouting we think that a point was missed. Is there really a single psychiatric condition called “autism”; or does that word conceal more than one condition lurking underneath?(see also LSS 28 8 25; 15 5 25 et seq)

Michael Marshall examines this question in a wide ranging article for the New Scientist[1] Now : when you do things as well as Marshall and the New Scientist do, you’ve every right to put it behind a paywall. So for those of you who can’t go round we’ll zoom in on two of the more intriguing research projects MIchael discusses, as they also hint at another topic we’ve also covered recently: but see below for that.

Firstly: what really does lie beneath the word autism? In different studies Dr Conor Liston and Dr Natalie Sauerwold were both able to group people with autism into four reliable categories according to the traits which their subjects presented. Unfortunately, the two classifications that each scientist came up with did not always overlap . But both teams were using different techniques: and of course this work is very new. Intriguingly for LSS readers Dr Liston also found

That brain regions with altered circuitry in autistic people……also showed characteristic changes in gene expression……

But being a good journalist , Michael warns us against over interpretation here. Modifications in neural architecture may not be caused solely by underlying genes: they could also be due to the brain re-wiring itself, to compensate for defects in an entirely different region, whose construction is the responsibility of an entirely different set of genes.

Hardened members LSS community will recall our enthusiastic blogs ( LSS 15 12 25; 29 2 25) wherein we discussed the exciting findings which do indeed hint at a demonstrable link between gene frequencies and reliable patterns of behaviour. Neither those findings, nor these ones on autism, are yet conclusive. But they show which way the wind is blowing: and we think it is in a hopeful direction

[1] https://www.newscientist.com/article/2509117-what-if-the-idea-of-the-autism-spectrum-is-completely-wrong/

#autism #psychiatric disorder #neurological disorder #genetics

Devi Sridhar on weight loss drugs: another class in careful thinking

If one thing has captured the zeitgeist this year , it’s weight loss drugs. You know the ones like semaglutide which mimic the effects of the hormone GLP-1. Everyone’s talking about them, half of everyone’s thinking of trying them, everyone knows someone who has started a course. Certainly an up-to-the minute, contemporary cutting edge (that’s enough adjectival phrases-ed) blog like LSS cannot afford to ignore them. But what to think? Who has the wisdom, the learning, the cool balanced judgement to advise, consult and warn?

The answer of course is Professor Devi Sridhar, whose sagacious thoughts we have channelled here before (LSS 3 4 25;23 8 24) on matters as diverse as antibiotics and how to read things you find on the Interweb. Writing in the Guardian[1] she presents not only a balanced view of the pros and cons, she acknowledges the complexity of the subject. In this she echoes the methods of another writer we have admired here. Simon Kuper (LSS 28 5 25)

And so she notes the advantages and disadvantages of these new drugs- what happens when you stop taking them? -is one caveat among many which she offers us . She smiles at The incipient war between the pharmaceutical companies who want to flog you these things, and the vast food and catering industries who want to flog you things which will make you fat. And above all the awful dilemma faced by decent rational people such as the World Health Organisation. Who know the real problem of obesity is rooted in poverty, ignorance, conspicuous consumption and other cultural tropes which reveal such unflattering truths about humanity. But who nevertheless have come to feel, reluctantly, that the new drugs offer the only practicable solution to the epidemic of obesity that threatens public health world wide. Amd perhaps this is the clearest cognitive lesson of all which she offers. For it echoes the doctrine of the great John Maynard Keynes who stated: “when the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do sir?”

A worthy doctrine for Whigs, rationalists and progressives of all shades, everywhere.

[1]https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/dec/31/world-health-organization-anti-obesity-jabs-2025?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

[2]https://uk.news.yahoo.com/weight-loss-jabs-conditionally-backed-135200252.html

#obesity #public health #weight loss #poverty #lifestyle

LSS v The Guardian: Clash of the Titans. And the battleground is antibiotics

Readers of LSS, we present today a true clash of titans: us versus the popular daily newspaper The Guardian. For they have just published a leader article on antibiotics progress which takes an altogether different view to our own sunnily optimistic piece (LSS 18 12 25) about humanity’s general progress in solving the problem of antibiotic resistance. [1]

Avid readers will recall our effort well. Riffing on the work of the guardians very own Kat Lay (brilliant writer) we noted how the new antibiotics Zoliflodacin and Gepotidicin offered startling new horizons in the battle against gonorrhoea and other other unpleasant diseases of-well you know, down there, as they say. We hoped that, as antibiotics for these diseases had been developed, those for other diseases might soon follow. And thanks to Ms. Lay, we discovered the work of the Global Antibiotic Research and Development Partnership (GARDP) whose work we will now champion for ever more. All in all, everything was in a much better place than when we started this crusade, eleven long years ago, we concluded.

Not so fast, says The Guardian. Humanity may actually be losing the race to develop these new drugs. Since 2017 only 16 new antibiotics have achieved approval, and none of them are very different to the old ones. Which means resistance to them can be expected very soon. Point to them, we concede. They namecheck GARDP again, noting its work as a positive. But that the financial structures designed to encourage pharmaceutical companies to step up to the mark are still rather new. And-more points to the team from York Place- there is a rather incisive survey of where all these new antibiotics are to come from. Old LSS favourites like natural sources and AI modelling are acknowledged. But they are not all-curing magic wands. And what to do with any new antibiotics anyway? Ration them carefully, so that resistance develops more slowly? How do you do that in a world of billions, where people and information flow so freely, and the profits of piracy are so temptingly in reach? Gentle readers, your editors did not think of those ones fully either.

OK, we throw in the towel. Guardian 3 LSS 0 (FT). When it comes to superior knowledge, close reasoning and intellectual power, they have got us beat. But we take consolation gentle readers, When the genetic dice roll, they roll evenly. They got all the brains. We got all the charm and good looks. As the last picture above demonstrates very clearly. And yes- we promise another cocktail recipe before New Year.

[1]https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/dec/29/the-guardian-view-on-antibiotics-recent-breakthroughs-are-great-news-but-humanity-is-losing-the-bi

#antibiotic resistance #antibiotics #health #medicine #microbiology #epidemiology #GARDP

More startling news on psychiatric disorders-and we think it’s even better than last time

It is our honest opinion, patient readers, that the terrible problem of psychiatric disorder is on the point of being understood. On the same level that is, as illnesses such as measles, salmonella poisoning or scurvy. We think we know why, as we will explain below. But first to the work which gives us this hope, following as it does on our recent blog Psychiatric Disorders: is this a game changing moment? (LSS 18 12 2025)

Writing for the Guardian, David Shariatmadari reviews The Divided Mind by Edward Bullmore, a profoundly learned man who has devoted his life to investigating and alleviating the sufferings of those afflicted by mental disorders. It is a sweeping book, magisterially covering the disputes between the warring schools of thought and the decades of honest but often misguided attempts to effect cures and diagnoses. Too much to cover here, but we implore you to read the review, if not the book itself [1] [2] But, in a nutshell, it was this passage that truly excited us

(shariatmadari notes the remarkable process in understanding diseases like TB),then :

Schizophrenia may finally be on the cusp of that transformation – something truly momentous, given the puzzle this strange and brutal disease has posed for so long. As Bullmore carefully explains, advances in scanning, maths, genomics and immunology have piled up to give us a clearer understanding of the illness. It is probably caused by the abnormal development of brain networks in childhood and adolescence; this, the evidence suggests, happens under the influence of immune dysfunction, and the cause of that is variation in a broad range of genes, interacting in particular ways with the environment. Triggers can include infections, abuse, social stress or drug use.

And now for why we are so hopeful. We genuinely think that the work of Bullmore, and the scholars covered in the last blog, suggest that at last a new paradigm has formed. It has only been possible because of advances in disciplines like Immunology, complexity theory, genetics and catastrophe theory, and the technologies to support the vast data sets which this new learning requires. And with them should come the key concepts of robust diagnosis, risk factor, causal mechanism and, please, God-lasting ameliorations. We stress again that we do not belittle the heroic efforts of past investigators, who did not have the tools now available. New paradigms never make the old ones wrong. But they suddenly solve the problems the last one could not, and open the way to new lines of discovery which the old one could never have predicted. Einstein did not refute Newton, he simply went beyond. And it was the same for thinkers like Darwin, Kepler and Planck. It is our honest opinion that another such paradigm shift has arrived, gentle readers, We hope it will make the life of the world better too,

[1]https://www.theguardian.com/books/2025/dec/17/the-divided-mind-by-edward-bullmore-review-do-we-now-know-what-causes-schizophrenia?CMP=Share_iOSAp

[2]The Divided Mind: A New Way of Thinking About Mental Health by Edward Bullmore is published by New River (£20). To support the Guardian buy a copy at guardianbookshop.com. Delivery charges may apply.

#psychiatric disorder #health #immunology #genetics #complexity #disease #medicine

Psychiatric Disorders: Is this discovery a game-changing moment?

Why can we not do more to address psychiatric disorders? We have always regretted the lack of a robust model which links biological cause to behaviour (LSS 11 5 22;14 9 24 et al) Without this treatment can never achieve the same efficacy as it has for thousands of “physical” disorders such as infectious diseases, cancers or deficiency diseases.

Today It is our earnest hope that all this may be about to change. Read this Hidden links between psychiatric condition from Nature Briefing

DNA data from more than one million people suggests that the genetic risk factors linked to many psychiatric conditions fall into five clusters that cut across current diagnostic boundaries. For example, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and autism, which are classified as separate conditions, both fall into the neurodevelopmental category. The findings hint that the fact that people tend to be diagnosed with multiple disorders at once is a reflection of shared underlying biology, and could help to create a more biologically based way of understanding psychiatric conditions.

Nature | 5 min read
Reference: Nature paper

If this work can be confirmed and extended, then it offers a tantalising possibility: this particular observable gene cluster is associated with this set of behaviours. And not another set of behaviours, which turn have their own identifiable gene cluster. Simple. Robust. Falsifiable. Empirical. What’s more, the clusters seem to make a curious rule-of-thumb sense. One for neurodevelopmental disorders such as ASD and ADHD. The second for internalising disorders such as anxiety, depression and so on. A third for compulsive ones like OCD and anorexia. A fourth for psychotic ones such as bipolar and schizophrenia And a fifth for substance abuse disorders. Simply put , each cluster may have particular underlying neurological architecture. In which case the underlying mechanism may be discerned; and treatment found.

Now for the caveats. First of all, it’s early days and we need to see how the work holds up against existing diagnostic frameworks. Secondly, only a fool would rule out epigenetic and environmental contributions to psychiatric malfunction. As for the thought of any treatments based on the new findings-well, they have to be decades away if possible at all,.

And yet….to end on a personal note. Nothing is sadder, nothing so moves us as seeing yet another lost soul, another hopeless cry for help, in the face of a victim pf psychiatric disorder. And to know the terrible sufferings imposed upon themselves, their families, carers and the professionals who come up against them, which includes anyone from emergency service workers to housing professionals. And to know that nothing can be done, despite the whole of modern science and learning. But now, just maybe, we have a real game changer on our hands, There is something to pray for this Christmas.

#psychiatric disorders #mental health #medicine #neurology #health #society

New antibiotic for gonorrhoea: more good news for antibiotic resistance fans everywhere

Once more we feel that things are moving in our direction. And just in time for Christmas too! Thanks to a story by the redoubtable Kat Lay of the Guardian, we bring you news of not one, but two new antibiotics, gentle readers. Both Zoliflodacin and Gepotidacin have passed major trials and have been approved this very month by the US Food and Drug Administration. Always a major step in their progress to world-wide use.[1]

We will keep our bit short today. Kat’s excellent story is a lucid and succinct presentation of all you need to know-infection rates, strains, statistics and the marvellous groups of educated, open minded people who have worked so hard to get humanity to this stage. Suffice it to say you might wish to learn more about Global Antibiotic Research & Development Partnership (GARDP) who seem to be just the sort of people we have been hoping to have around in this crisis (thanks for that, Kat) So, go on-click.

Hardened fans of LSS and the antibiotics resistance community in general will be aware of our earlier thoughts on this aspect of the problem(LSS 19 2 24; 12 9 24) It is a genuine pleasure to see advances being made, and not just in STDs, after more than ten years of campaigning. The antibiotics crisis is not over yet; but compared with where we were about 2015, this feels better. So, although we are not going to let up, enough time has been bought to devote a little of it to another of our bêtes noires: the intractable mystery of mental illness and its causes. But this time, we think there’s hope there too. Don’t miss our next amazing blog.

[1https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2025/dec/16/health-antibiotic-resistance-drugs-superbugs-sexually-transmitted-gonorrhoea

[2]https://gardp.org/

#antibiotic resistance #microbiology #health #medicine #bacteria #STD #GARDP