If Sleep Evolved Before Brains as the Hydra seems to show, What then is the Function of Sleep? 2021-05-20 Jorma Jyrkkanen jormabio@hotmail.com

If sleep evolved before Brains as the Hydra seems to show, What then is the Function of Sleep? 2021-05-20 Jorma Jyrkkanen jormabio@hotmail.com I have a hypothesis. Sleep evolved to reduce cortisol so that anti inflammatory cytokines would reduce inflammation and foster tissue healing from the ravages of a day of struggle for existence. The trail of evidence. How ancient is cortisol? Well it is present in bony fish, the teleosts, so is as ancient as they are. This means cortisol was present at least 160 Mya. But Hydra have even greater antiquity. Hydra (/ˈhaɪdrə/ HY-drə) is a genus of small, fresh-water organisms of the phylum Cnidaria and class Hydrozoa. They are native to the temperate and tropical regions. Biologists are especially interested in Hydra because of their regenerative ability – they do not appear to die of old age.They may have a cortisolo analogue but not the hormone itself. Cortisol has been reported in tissues of mollusks and crustaceans (Summavielleet al., 1995; Boseet al., 1997) suggesting a common ancestor to mollusks and crustaceans and teleosts had cortisol. Suffice it to say this hormnone has great antiquity. What then is its function in humans? High cortisol prevents anti inflammatory cytokine production leading to slower healing. Do we need a brain for this effect? Probably not. But if we can have a good sleep without stress cortisol might drop and real healing can take place for damage accrued through a hard day. Cortisol apparently evolved from steroid hormone receptors that only recognized estrogen when two mutations which enabled receptors to recognize hormones like estrogen, testosterone and cortisol (Joe Thronton, U of C, Junre 24, 2013). The p53 TSG gene spends a goodly amount of time sending defective cells to the dustbin and so does the immune system in wrapping up and digeting germs and worms and the ubiquitin proteasome system is busy as well in maintenance of a healthy cellular and tissue environment. All of this activity produces a fair amount of trash that has to be taken out. Sleep enables energy to channel to this task and heal the damage of a day of struggle. I am left with the hypothesis that when we sleep, cortisol levels drop enabling anti-inflammatory cytokines to help with healing and all these other repair mechanisms. Elevated cortisol levels are negatively associated with wound healing and probably cell repair and p53 gene and ubiquitin proteasome garbage removal. We owe this ability to two mutations 500 mya and sophisticated TSG genes, immune system evolution and the UPS. When proteins are made there are a lot of mistakes that have to be shredded. Molecular evolution is essential for higher life evolution.

Covid Lockdown Cost/Benefits:A Critical Assessment of the LiteratureDouglas W. Allen∗April 2021

ABSTRACTAn examination of over 80 Covid-19 studies reveals that many relied on assump-tions that were false, and which tended to over-estimate the benefits and under-estimate the costs of lockdown. As a result, most of the early cost/benefit studiesarrived at conclusions that were refuted later by data, and which rendered theircost/benefit findings incorrect. Research done over the past six months has shownthat lockdowns have had, at best, a marginal effect on the number of Covid-19deaths. Generally speaking, the ineffectiveness of lockdown stems from volun-tary changes in behavior. Lockdown jurisdictions were not able to prevent non-compliance, and non-lockdown jurisdictions benefited from voluntary changes inbehavior that mimicked lockdowns. The limited effectiveness of lockdowns ex-plains why, after one year, the unconditional cumulative deaths per million, andthe pattern of daily deaths per million, is not negatively correlated with the stringency of lockdown across countries. Using a cost/benefit method proposed by Professor Bryan Caplan, and using two extreme assumptions of lockdown effectiveness, the cost/benefit ratio of lockdowns in Canada, in terms of life-years saved, is between 3.6–282. That is, it is possible that lockdown will go down asone of the greatest peacetime policy failures in Canada’s history.∗email: allen@sfu.ca. Department of Economics, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada.Thanks to various colleagues and friends for their comments. Study http://www.sfu.ca/~allen/LockdownReport.pdf

Does retardation and insanity confer evolutionary fitness? Dec. 26th, 2008 Jorma Jyrkkanen jormabio@hotmail.com

Does retardation and insanity confer evolutionary fitness? Dec. 26th, 2008 at 12:31 PM Why Retardation and Insanity is So Conservative in Human Populations is a Matter of Evolutionary Fitness. Related Tags : genetic, issues, mental health, society, environment It confers evolutionary fitness without competition. 26 Dec 2008 I have been pondering more reasons why retardation is expressed in so many genes on the X chromosome and why insanity is so widespread in our species and I have come up with some possibilities. As you are aware if you follow my blogs, my early reason was that suspicion enables detection of dangerous individuals before they can act. If it causes collateral damage to those that are not a threat, thats the price for the increased survival value of suspicion. But what else. Surely that only has value in war time and if someone is potentially going to run off with your mate or jobs or career or assets. It dawned on me this morning as I was driving along the highway. It creates competitor free space and circumvents the need to actively compete. People are afraid of irrational individuals and avoid them. They have the potential for sudden unprovoked violence. It enables them to occupy space without competition. This has enormous survival value. It also enables them to circumvent participation in normal work which is a drain on energy. It ensures that they will be taken care of without expending any effort and they can lounge about without working like royalty. Would you mess with a psychopath's lover? Never. It also excuses them from normal treatment by the criminal justice system. In schools, kids that are mentally challenged, do not have to expend the same energy for grades because they will be taken care of regardless of how well they do. They also get more personalized attention. All of these things make insanity a valuable asset for a portion of the population, who would clearly lose the struggle to fit in and carve a niche. It also creates opportunities for clever fakers. I believe that these considerations explain the why numerous insanity genes on the X chromosome are conservative. The headhunters of Borneo used to range through vast head-hunting areas searching for victims. As a result of this, vast areas were unpopulated from sheer terror thus available as hunting grounds. The insane capitalize on this basic fact and use it to make servants of society. Jormawankenobe Copyright 2008 J. Jyrkkanen Tags: genes insanity conservative mental fitne

Bronze Age Weapons and Artifacts in a Museum in France. 5 Feb. 2011. Jorma Jyrkkanen jormabio@hotmail.com

Bronze Age Weapons and Artifacts Feb. 5th, 2011 at 4:55 AM Jormawankenobe Plays Electric 12 String Bronze Age Weapons and Artifacts, Museum of Macoun France 5 February 2011 The toolkit of the warrior, hunter and home builder of the Bronze age, typical of the kinds that would have been in use in the Grotto and surrounding community of Aze for example, in the East of France. Spears made of bronze.

Bronze Age Weapons and Artifacts Feb. 5th, 2011 at 4:55 AM Jormawankenobe Plays Electric 12 String Bronze Age Weapons and Artifacts, Museum of Macoun France 5 February 2011 The toolkit of the warrior, hunter and home builder of the Bronze age, typical of the kinds that would have been in use in the Grotto and surrounding community of Aze for example, in the East of France. Spears made of bronze. Pottery of Bronze. Bronze Swords. Bronze Age Kiln or Hearth. bronze Age Burial. More Bronze Age Swords. Bronze Age Axes. Bronze Age Arrow, Dagger and Meat hook. Copyright 2011 Jorma Jyrkkanen. All rights reserved. Tags: Bronze age, weapons, tools artifacts, France, Jorma Jyrkkanen Tags: bronze age, france, jorma jyrkkanen, tools artifacts, weapons Pottery of Bronze.

Bronze Swords.

Bronze Age Kiln or Hearth.

bronze Age Burial.

More Bronze Age Swords.

Bronze Age Axes.

Bronze Age Arrow, Dagger and Meat hook.

Copyright 2011 Jorma Jyrkkanen. All rights reserved. Tags: Bronze age, weapons, tools artifacts, France, Jorma Jyrkkanen Tags: bronze age, france, jorma jyrkkanen, tools artifacts, weapons

The Great Deception, Our Holographic Delusion December 15, 2013. Jorma Jyrkkanen.

The Great Deception, Our Holographic Delusion December 15, 2013

Photons impinging on our retinas fire receptors on them and these send signals to the regions of the brain which generate a 3 dimensional image in our minds eye and we perceive this as reality. However, if we change the energy of the photons and use receptors like those in CERN, ie like Alice, we get a different image of the universe. We get an image of sprays of particles of different kinds at different dimensions. At higher and higher energies we get into deeper and deeper dimensions and less and less particles until they are essentially quarks, gluons, high energy photons. If we could go higher still we might find string balls and then finally loops of string bits at Planck scales or some other reality like loop quantum gravity spin foam. At each dimension we penetrate our image of what the universe is changes as the information we retrieve about it grows. There are also limits to how deeply we can go into space time. The event horizon of Black holes is one and the visible time horizon of the invisible past behind the big bang singularity and the edge of the universe beyond which we can never see. It is safe to conclude therefore that the secular biologically moderated physiological x-y-z-t resolution image we have of this universe with our naked natural eye is analogous to a 2-D painting of a 3 D or even a 10-D object. We are only seeing a shallow image of a deeper reality, a hologram if you will. Ergo the holographic universe. The images, objects, world we see and recall while beautiful in the extreme are not the reality, only shallow photon reflections and emission generated mental representations of it. Copyright 2013 Jorma Jyrkkanen. All rights reserved.

Spike Protein Found to be Principle Agent of Harm by Leading to Rupture of Mitochondria and Other Ailments by SALK Researchers May 10, 2021. Jorma Jyrkkanen.

Spike Protein Found to be Principle Agent of Harm by Leading to Rupture of Mitochondria and Other Ailments by SALK Researchers May 10, 2021 2021-05-10 Jorma Jyrkkanen

Antibiotic Rupture of Mitochondria Similar to Spike Rupture My comment on this is that Antibiotics may assist the spike protein to harm mitochondria leading to greater risk of cancer and heart disease by releasing ROS and Lipid Peroxide and assisting mitochondrial rupture thereby depriving the heart of its ATP energy supply. These changes have been linked in prior reviews by me to heart disease and cancer. Similarity of mitochondrial damage could be forensic evidence of broad spectrum antibiotic use on terminal covid patients. Spike Protein is the Principle Agent of Harm by Rupturing Mitochondria. Antibiotics will Multiply this Harm.

Primer for Police Chiefs on Why Occupy Wall street Exists. 17 Feb 2012. Jorma Jyrkkanen

Primer for Police Chiefs on Why Occupy Exists February 17, 2012 Solidarity. 25 November 2011

I address my thoughts to the assembled youth who are here both worried about our common future and concerned about finding a meaningful, stable and prosperous niche in the scheme of things. I have admired your determination and growing resolve and these thoughts come to mind as a senior naturalist who has seen so much travesty amidst wonderful opportunity. The task is large and the opposition entrenched. To move a mountain we must use shovels but it can be done. The Titanic Agenda of Plutocrats is destroying the planet and is too unstable and imbalanced to be trusted to care for humanity. Growing ever larger, Titanic is headed for an iceberg, end of Oil, end of Gas, high temperatures, rising oceans, flooded countries and cities, 13 billion passengers, dams clogging up with silt and a food and transportation crisis with possible nuclear wars. The end I predict with our present course will be about 2125-2150. This is unacceptable. Titanic must not stand. The oil cartels, multinationals, banks, speculators and profiteers, trader pandering puppet business governments must be brought to account. The rich getting richer while the poor starve, become homeless, compete with sweat shops, lose their children through suicide drugs or jail must end. The river of wealth flows the wrong way and must be reversed. Your duty is one of caring and compassion for earth, all its creatures and ecosystems and humanity. It is not a fun thing to do because you are privileged or because you may feel disenfranchised. It is a vital necessity for our survival. Extinction rates presently equal those of the 85% extinction at the KT boundary. This is unacceptable and it is the fault of Titanic and it must not stand. Land reform is a global requisite of establishing an equitable and just society. Those who usurped the life supporting commons for personal profit must pay for the lives they displaced through monopolization of the commons. Poverty is an artificial deliberate creation by plutocrats via discriminatory tax policy, monetary policy, gambling and profiteering by speculators and theft of the commons. The agenda must be ‘living in harmony with ecosystems and sustainability’. Alternate energy is absolutely the only way. Limiting human population through family planning is the other must do. 1% owns the banks, Wall Street and clones, governments, media, Titanic agenda, the police, laws, armies, most of the commons once our mutual asset, through debt and monopoly, most of you and me. These massive egregious injustices must be redressed and reversed. The war machines alone consume trillions of dollars, that is misappropriated from social justice and environment. The global war machine must be killed. It is simply unacceptable, and the politics of fear that feeds it must be banned forever. Let no arrogant regime, theocracy, dictatorship, strong boss republic, monarchy or corrupt democracy lie any longer about how good the Titanic agenda is. Scrap it. That is your duty for your children and grandchildren and our very survival as a species depends upon it. My generation has failed yours and our common future and I am deeply sorry. PS Darwin was right. Physical evolution made the universe, organic evolution created life. The universe made a mind for itself, us, and we now ponder our very existence in the universe from which we arose, and ponder what must be done so that the majesty of our collossus will have its mind working for goodness sake. Universal evolution is the creator and we must live by our parents rules. Those rules are absolute. Evolution turns into a vindictive Goddess when she is violated who eats species for breakfast, a fact to which Homo sapiens exoterrata carboniferii are no exception. She requires respect for spaceship earth and wisdom and truth at the helm and the course plotted by goodness and science, not avarice and the lust for power. Harmony must be our guide, our chart. Social justice must ensure that harmony comes to supervene in the affairs of humanity. We must find a new agenda and shape a paradigm that has a future for all species including our own. Adding to the urgency of this duty is the fact that it is not at all certain we can stop the ecological changes we have unleashed leading to catastrophe but you have no choice but to roll up your sleeves and move that mountain. The trail to find the source of the Titanic Agenda causing the death of labour and this planet leads me to a shocking conclusion and it will you too. The rest is up to you at OccupyWorld. References: Titanic Agenda: Boom and Bust towards Collective Suicide http://www.cccma.ec.gc.ca/diagnostics/cgcm3-t47/animation_sresa1b_st_glb.shtml http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/ http://www.economist.com/content/global_debt_clock http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/ http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/P/Populations.html http://rainforests.mongabay.com/deforestation.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil http://jorma-jyrkkanen.livejournal.com/84926.html Carcinogens in Fracking. http://jorma-jyrkkanen.livejournal.com/182870.html The Plutocrats’ Secret Society http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/what-price-the-new-democracy-goldman-sachs-conquers-europe-6264091.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP362CWj2fo CapitalismInventsTheoryAdHoc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOP2V_np2c0 http://www.wimp.com/crisescapitalism/ CapitalismsNaziPast. http://coat.ncf.ca/our_magazine/links/53/rockefeller.html http://thecounterpunch.hubpages.com/hub/The_Bush-Nazi_scandal_by_John_Loftus_former_Federal_Prosecutor Continued business with oppressive regimes Circa 2012 Capitalism and derivatives trading, USA>$700 trillion potential fraud market. http://video.pbs.org/video/1302794657/# http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06-t6xQNyVU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym4TTmOJ4I8&feature=related Cancer causing chemicals. http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Meetings/PriorityAgents.pdf Jorma Jyrkkanen Environmental Biologist Philosopher Naturalist Copyright 2011 Jorma Jyrkkanen. All rights reserved. Tags: survival, humanity, planet earth, titanic, Jorma Jyrkkanen

Is Capitalism the Next Asteroid, Chicxulub II That Dooms Our Planet. March 27, 2013. Jorma Antero Jyrkkanen

CAPITALISM

What is Capitalism by Jorma Jyrkkanen 8 March 2013 Capitalism is an absolute kleptocratic cannibalistic Monarchy of corporate Plutocrats that converts the blood, sweat, tears, dreams and slavery of the masses into personal fortunes by devouring the energy, ingenuity, lives, resources, biodiversity and common property of Planet Earth via puppet mafias called government. It matters not if those governments are communist, theocratic, democratic or tribal, they are all puppet vehicles for that cannibal cabal. They dupe the masses into believing they too can become rich beyond their wildest dreams and that this is the road to freedom and happiness. They do this with a spin machine called hollywood and commercials that peddles the lie that growth has no limits and every girl can be a princess who finds a prince with a castle and a dungeon full of gold. Spice this toxic cocktail up with criminal mafias, laundry money, offshore accounts and corrupt officials and government leaders and you get what we have globally, 1% rich beyond belief and 99% Serfs paying homage to them and our planet going to hell at an accelerating rate.

My Literature Review found that EMF causes brain cancer 1and leukemia in kids 1990. New Study EMF causes Brain Cancer 2009. Jorma Jyrkkanen

My study EMF and brain cancer 1990 New Study EMF causes Brain Cancer 2009 March 17, 2009 jjyrkkanen76@outlook.com 2009 EMF Study Brain Cancer in Kids My Study Same Result 1990 See https://jorma-jyrkkanen.blogspot.com/search?q=EMF Added : Tuesday, March 17th 2009 by quarksandgenes Related Tags : health, news, technology, cancer, children I released an almost identical result 19 years ago. Brain Cancer in Kids. What is taking so long for action to take place? 17 March 2009 Children who use cellphones are five times more likely to develop malignant brain tumors. Headline in The Province Newspaper Tuesday March 17 2009. Here is my comprehensive review of the subject which I published in 1990 where I conclude that brain cancer and leukemia are increased by exposure to EMF. Kids have been dying from these diseases for 19 years because nobody acted on my overview assessment when I made it public. I am furious at the establishment, at the utility companies, and at the health services of the developed world. We have been killing kids for no good reason whatsoever. http://www.geocities.com/jormabio/archive/emfcarcinogenicity.html My EMF Study Conclusion, 1990 This EMF Cancer review is based on literature references obtained from Bonneville Power, Battelle and BC Hydro, spanning 1979-1989 and from a computor search of DIALOG databases for 1989-90. I have since become aware that DIALOG has had a legal battle with CAS, Chemical Abstracts Society, and this may have led to less reporting of actual published research than that which I obtained at least for my 1989-90 computor online update, so there may be gaps. How the librarian chose which studies I would receive from the total list I asked for is not clear so a source of bias could have been enterred there. It has also been argued that findings which show no effects are less likely to get published. I seriously question this however, since it is in the vested interests of utilities to make widely known any such null effects, and they would promote the publication of such studies. If anything, perhaps the reverse is true. Perhapsthesetwotendencies cancel out and a truly representative pattern of negative and positive findings is in fact published. There is a massive problem with controls in the majority of these studies since EMF is so wide-spread, it is almost impossible to get an unexposed group. The best that can be hoped for is a less exposed group. However, even this runs into trouble interpretation-wise when one considers that specific windows of frequency and intensity and combinations may be more important in causality than simple density of electric or magnetic fields. The effect of using national averages as controls where even the controls have been exposed to EMF to some degree, is to underestimate the true effect of EMF so that5 it is safe to say that it is worse than experimentally demonstrated. RESULTS The conclusions one is drawn to from an overview such as this are inescapable. EMF or something to do with EMF makes leukemia worse if not actually causing it or some forms of it, though the evidence points strongly towards causality. Brain cancer is made worse or actually caused by EMF or an associated factor. Other cancers are probably made worse or promoted by EMF exposure. Fundamental genetic and perhaps epigenetic cellular physiology changes occur, some permanently, from certain tunings or windows of EMF. Effects on development can be profound and species variability in susceptability to EMF impacts is largely unknown. Confounding variables like chemical pollutants, solvent vapors, metals, may be operative synergistically as initiators, promoters, physiological poisons, hormone analogs, or cocarcinogens ormayworkthrough harming the immune system. CONCLUSION It is safe to conclude from a reading of the totality of studies relating EMF to cancer, to which I have accessed so far, that EMF is a highly probable cancer hazard contributing worldwide to significantly increased human and non-human morbidity and mortality. While it may be more statistically formal to do a Meta-Analysis on the studies (Mann, C. 1990. Meta-Analysis in the Breech. Science (249):476-480.), the trends are so strong that I doubt that any significant change in the final interpretation would result. This conclusion isn’t likely to be reversed by even a few well done studies showing the opposite because of the massive weight of evidence showing an effect. I therefore conclude that a policy of prudent avoidance of exposure and protection of organisms from unwitting exposure to EMF, coupled to improved measures to avoid those potential synergistic substances, is wise at this time. From my review, it is clear that there are potential medical benefits to continued research in this area however as regards cancer treatment and prevention and other diseases and conditions, and I urge funding sources to donate generously to such endeavors. I wish to thank Dr. Robert Dykes, MD for financial assistance in securing the computer search and DIALOG bibliography, Kathy Ruggles of the College of New Caledonia for her untiring support and research efforts, and BC Hydro for providing the Battelle, Bonneville and Hydro bibliographies. © 1990, Jorma Jyrkkanen. All Rights Reserved. Contact jormabio@hotmail.com Jormawankenobe Copyright 2009 J. Jyrkkanen. All rights reserved.

Ancient Finnish religion and evolution merge into logical scientific Naturalism. 19 Nov 2008 . Jorma Antero Jyrkkanen

Ancient Finnish Religion in the Context of Darwinian Naturalism April 20, 2009 Ancient Finnish religion and evolution merge into logical scientific Naturalism. Nov. 19th, 2008 at 12:24 AM Ancient Finnish religion and evolution merge into logical scientific Naturalism. 17 November 2008 Ukko, the boss God made it all possible because he was the Boss. He had a wife Akka. Ukko was kind of like the energy of the universe before the big bang and Akka was kind of like the gluons for that energy. But he was also the laws of nature after the big bang. Ilmatar was a fertile idea that just existed and was also there just longing to do something because she got bored easy counting rainbows and with the wind playing with her hair. She wanted a son so the East wind heard this and took pity and buffeted her around in love making and she soon got pregnant and collapsed and there inside her was conceived an old man, Vainamoinen whose Dad was the wind. A duck that metamorphosed into an eagle landed on her knee and laid six eggs and one of iron. Now things were going along fine til she moved her leg which was falling asleep and she needed to go pee and the eggs rolled off into the ocean where they stirred up a collosal storm ie the big bang and the churning cauldron turned into the heavens and the earth and one yolk formed the sun Paivatar and another formed the moon Kuu in a kind of evolution of the universe. The black yolk of the iron egg became a thundercloud. The duck metamorphosing into an eagle is a metaphor for things are not what they seem but are far more powerful. Like the energy in an atom. Ilmatar finished the job and shaped the land and sky and everything. Ilmatar was the gravity of space time and the plasma gluon quark creation shortly after the big bang and she metamorhposed into atoms and celestial object s and galaxies and solar systems through physical evolution of the universe. She then began practicing organic evolution. Ilmatar at this stage is the evolution of planet earth into habitable life supporting environment. Then she gave birth to Vainamoinen, a man, through a very protracted painful birth which is a metaphor for the evolution of Human kind. He invented the Finnish harp, the Kantele and had a contest for a good looking babe, Aino, with Joukahainen and the two played incredible licks but Vainamoinen won but lost the contest cause the love of his life drowned. He was choked up about this because she was really hot. This parable part embodies the concept of competition for survival and natural selection and the role of serendipity and stochastic quantum process’s. Vainamoinen also had a magic box with which he could make whatever he wanted, and this myth incredibly forecast and parabled both the creative power of DNA and RNA and the computer. Now Ahti is the water god and he lives on a cliff, a Jyrk, which is where my name came from, Jyrkkanen. He is a moody guy and looks after the fish and the waters and is a water conservator and a whirlpool and a storm brewer. He has a wife Vellamo who is also moody and neither one of them likes pollution very much and are just as happy to drown a sailor as give him a rich bounty. Ahti is the biodiversity of the oceans and its evolution and ecology. The forest god Tapio has a beard of lichens and eyebrows of moss and is made entirely of trees. His wife Mielikki is completely pleasing and beautiful and most likely covered in flowers and delicious berries and helpful and marvelous and they have two children Nyyrikki forest god of hunting and cattle and Goddess of the Woods daughter Tuulikki who stocks the forest with edible creatures large and small. You don’t want to anger these two off or you will starve and get lost and freeze to death. You want to make sure you keep them happy with good forest and wildlife conservation practices. This lot is in evolution terms evolution of biodiversity in the terrestrial ecosystems of the world. Now if you don’t pay homage to these powerful gods by good resource management and paying taxes for conservation you will meet Ajatar, the evil demon god of sickness and disease, mother of the devil in dragon form who suckles snakes and breast feeds demons and she will kill you with nasty consequences, ie loss of habitat and plagues and bad genes. One look at her face can spell doom. Now there is one really nasty dude, the Demon god Lempo, god of evil. If you play with nuclear bombs or mess with natural selection and ignore evolution you will meet this dude. He creates bad luck, illness, harmful deleterious mutations and really mean people. What is paradoxical about this dude is that he is also the god of love and in this regard is sexual selection in evolutionary biology. He has a mortal enemy, the wizardish demigod Lemminkainen, my nicname as a kid, who ended up stuck together with sticky glue by the Goddess of veins and blood Suonetar. Now Suonetar can be thought of as Goddess of science and medicine. What is abundantly clear is the incredible harmony of this ancient pagan religion with theories of the evolution of the universe and with geological chemical, organic and biochemical evolutionary biology on earth. Jormawankenobe (Jorma, a popular name, means the chosen one in Finnish mythology) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCA0SLV6CzeqhEHJz2_l9fYA

Jorma Antero Jyrkkanen, BSc, PDP(Educ) Profile 2010 July 13, 2009 Jorma Jyrkkanen Profile 2010

Jorma Antero Jyrkkanen, BSc, PDP(Educ) Profile 2010 July 13, 2009 Jorma Jyrkkanen Profile 2010

Jorma eats red snapper I am a lifelong nature lover and environmental researcher who has found the meaning of life! I dedicate this site to the Prevention of Cancer and Preservation of Planet Earth’s Creatures and to the Seekers of Truth and Sustainable Ecological Equilibrium ie. Conservation Biology and Ecology and Total Global Health. If it were an accredited establishment, I would call it the NeoDarwinian International Institute of Advanced Environmental and Philosophical Studies. As an Eco Sleuth, I can get pretty excited when I get onto the trail of a hot one. After discussions with Dr. David Monroe, USA Toxicologist, I analysed and discovered 350 ppm of carcinogenic 1,4-dioxane a few years back, in Vision herbicide, after the Feds and Monsanto said it was safe! I also found that the surfactant was polyoxyethyleneamine (POEA), a probable human carcinogen. These smoking pistols with Monsanto fingerprints all over them has resulted in a few changes in ‘Inert’ management and increased toxin contaminant disclosure in the US but not in Canada. The Feds subsequently and reluctantly admitted that they had corroboration on the dioxane contamination. My third most important observation, ‘Given Infinite Time and Space and Random Turns, the most Improbable Event Becomes Certitude'(JJ, 1974). Translated, this implies that quantum mechanics rules the universe and serendipity is our friend besides being the occassional pain in the butt. My hobbies are fishing, camping, canoing, hiking, climbing, xc and downhill skiing, composing medieval Viking dances on classical guitar, bird watching and especially hawks and owls. One of my goals is to expand my conservation studies and to continue this work for many years for nature. These investigations could be used as material in a university course in environmental toxicology. There are certainly many opportunities for a digression into researching numerous topics suggested by my review materials themselves. PHd’s lurk there. Another hobby of mine is making huge predictions, for example I predict that human caused global warming will cause post-glacial rebound and increased plate tectonic movements due to mass shifts over the plates with resulting increases in earthquakes, tsunamis and volcanism, possibly the first time an organism has ever done so on such a scale. If it leads to eruption of the Yellowstone volcano, it may also be our self induced undoing as a species. My friends are all wonderful unique individuals who excel at some fantastic thing they do. I believe I have discovered why Black bears are black. Grizzlies eat them and hunt at night. Its also why they climb trees. I write blogs. Several of my sites are 1.http://www.youtube.com/Jormawankenobe 2.http://www.blogster.com/quarksandgenes/ 3. I play guitar and compose music. http://www.youtube.com/Jormawankenobe and of course this site. 4. http://dasevolutionvongott/wordpress.com I have a gift from my 18 years in Northwestern BC and my years with the F&W Branch. I know where every good steelhead fishing hole in the country is and what gear to use to catch em. Same for chinook. I may write it up into a book one day. I believe that I have also discovered the main causes of cancer through my studies. The P’s that cause cancer. Pollution, Profit and Prevention-lack thereof. Look no further than smoking to see how true this is. I believe that cancers are for the most part preventable if the political will were to exist to eliminate carcinogens, mutagens, endocrine disruptors, immune system damaging chemicals and cancer promoters. The Stockholm Accord is a step in the right direction but it is far too narrow in scope. The CNA Nurses resolution is a strong step in the right direction but with a limited voice. The Earth Charter goes a long way towards environmental protection. But collectively, we can wield the biggest club with our pocketbook in the marketplace and in the stock exchange. For example, buy chlorine free food packaging. Studies in 2010 failed to find more than 1 cancer death in 600 cadavers from early Egypt supporting the idea I put forward that we in modern chemical society, cause cancer. Its a disease of the industrialization of nature. The individual can take preventative steps by life-style choices like organic foods, anti-cancer diets, avoiding carcinogen exposure and living in healthy environments though these are getting hard to find. The Cancer Orgs completely misallocate the monies donated to them. They should give ten percent to molecular geneticists and the rest to organizations dedicated to prevention. We could eliminate probably 60% of all cancers in short order by this more realistic focus on the cause instead of the wasteful quest for the magic bullet which just feeds the cancer industry. There are of course cancers that are contagious like those obtained via specific Herpes strains, Epstein-Barr virus, hepatitis virus, HIV, SV40, JC polyomaviruses, certain papillomas or other possible viruses like CMV which has been associated with colon and glioma cancers and these are possibly preventable by hygienic prophylaxis or possibly development of immunization anitsera or through understanding and controlling the mechanisms of contagion. Good news November 18th, 2002..My prediction has come true. A vaccine has been developed for HPV 16 which is completely effective against cervical cancer in preliminary trials. This was confirmed again in a large study done in 2005. Immunization can prevent contagious cancers. The common stomach ulcers bacteria has been implicated as a cause of gastric cancer and parasitic flukes, both and liver have been nailed as agents that cause cancer. Aspergillis mould fungi are also cancer causing. Breast cancer is mostly explainable by persistent organic pesticides and vinyl chloride and related pollutants that harm the genes through the endocrine system. Just like hormone therapy increases breast cancer incidence, so too do these chemicals that disrupt the endocrine systems. To prevent breast cancer, once again, fight pollution. For more info and prevention, check out my references in ‘Archives’. I believe that there are two major flaws in human civilization. In my personal opinion, which I express without malice, our philosophical underpinnings are irrational and the other is that our socio-economic policy founded on population growth and economic growth is ultimately unsustainable by the environment. We have had insufficient information to understand reality and insufficient distribution of intelligence to make sense of it regardless during the early course of our evolution and sadly this will continue for a long time. These imaginary solutions evolved quite naturally not only into the marvellous cultural diversity which we should celebrate, but also into the ethnic and religious arrogances we have seen warring amongst each other which now threaten global security and the environment. Security concerns arising from religion-based differences for example, have misappropriated vast vital financial and infrastructure resources which should go towards environmental repair and protection. Half of all wars are fought over religion which puts a huge burden of blame for global suffering on its practioners. It is valid to ask if a way of being which kills over 50 million people is a good thing. Science today is still fighting a rear-guard action for Darwin and modern cosmic and biological evolution theory against the primitive notion that the universe was created by magic because it has become commonly accepted that one can believe anything whether it is the truth or not, a perhaps highly dangerous and potentially suicidal notion. There can be only one truth in reality in one place and at one time. All the others must therefore be something else. Antagonistic groups have put themselves in boxes that differ from each other in only minute details in their thoughts yet they kill people in other boxes because of these minute differences. These groups have yet to open Darwin’s book and smell the aroma of scientific evolutionary coffee which would enable them to progress to a whole new reality unimaginable to our ignorant fore-bearers and unenlightened contemporaries. The AIDS pandemic, the drought and massive starvation in Africa and elsewhere, CJD, CWD, superbugs, pest epidemics, genocide, fisheries collapses, wars against Islamic ers, flood and fires, are reminders that Headmaster Darwin is ringing his bell on the steps of his school, calling the evolution non-believers to class to read his book and to understand our place. They are Nature, the driver of the horses of evolution, the mother of life, the creator of life, the sustainor of life, pulling the reins back, saying to humanity, ‘whoa boy, slow down and pull your goats back from my overgrazed land and stop your rampant carbon combustion and stop breeding like rabbits and wake up to the undeniable truth of evolution’. They are a natural result of ignoring nature, the health of ecosystems, overpopulation and limiting factors and of human society hitting the wall of continued unmitigated growth. They are the result of globalization of probably the most dangerous notion that ever existed, that prosperity requires population growth and that unrestrained growth of humanity is the best goal and that it can be fudged into sustainability. How dare we pack more people in while we squander so much of the existing humanity we have already produced while destroying ecosystems. Sustainability is notwithstanding a wonderful aspiration and part of any harmonizing concept but it alone will not stop habitat destruction and alienation and extinction because selfishness and dire necessity will prevent its full implementation. The infidels on this planet are not Professor Hashem Aghajari or Rushdi or the Jews or Atheists or Pagans or myself, but all those who destroy nature and deny evolution. This leads me to my first and most important observation. It was we humans who created all the gods, not the other way round. Evolution, a physical and organic process, is the creator. Humanity does not have dominion over nature but is rather a part of it and totally dependent upon it. You see my friends, nature operating through evolution, is both our planets life Creator and the Creation and to see her working we need just turn around and listen to her progeny singing in the springtime or blowing in the wind or spinning webs in the shadows or laughing in the playground. The time has come to put our inherited religious ideas into a folder called traditional mythologies and undergo collective cultural evolution for we now know that they were incorrect and move on to the verifiable pure truths of scientific evolution and a cosmologically scientifically consistent philosophy. Our socio-economic policy is rooted in the ancient primate hoarding instinct, our primal need for a peck-order and territorial tribalism, primitive hard-wired primate instincts we cannot escape but must try to control by rational over-sight. Clearly, our mischievous greedy, territorial, racist, promiscuous, warring little monkey genes still direct our cultural evolution and behaviour and may ultimately be our undoing. Don’t believe me. Check the human genome project and chimp DNA hybridization research projects (ex. Wildman et al Genomics studied 73104 DNA bases and found 99.01% similarity between chimps and humans) and keep an eye on nightly news covering human behaviour! It appears from our behaviour and our genetic similarities that we are in fact still monkeys. More profoundly, genetic researchers studying phylogeny, have found that our genes still share 500 genes in common with the earliest forms of life on earth, the Archaea, 5000 genes in common with fish, and identical eye genes in common with ocean flatworms and mice, providing support for the idea that we are related to all living things. My second best prediction back in the early 1970’s was that humanity was poised for an epidemic by a delayed lethal disease pathogen and AIDS came along. My follow-up prediction is that there is a still worse epidemic of an even more aggressive pathogen brewing. I also predict on this day, 7 May 2006, that MS is caused by Dioxin. It causes degenerative disease in every other species, why not human. The collapse of so many fisheries worldwide are the planet’s miners’ canaries going silent? Will we heed their message? Clearly we need to move to that new paradigm and I suggest rather than ‘Sustainable Development’, we pursue ‘Ecological Harmonization’. My first most important observation is that evolution is the creator, both noun and verb; physical inorganic evolution created the universe and organic biological evolution created life and we humans created the gods in our imagination. I am so convinced of my observations that they amount to a belief which is open to contrary evidence. It is this: My Creed: I believe that inorganic evolution creates and destroys universes; organic evolution creates life and all species. Energy is eternal and links everything everywhere. We are monkies made by evolution struggling in vain against our genetic inheritance to be something else. Evolution is the creator ergo God (a verb). We are created by the universe from the universe by physical and organic evolution and are a part of the universe and connected to it in every way. We are the universe pondering itself and are the mind of the universe, however transient. Evolution, both physical and organic are the creators acting on eternal energy which emerged from the singularity.

Gardacil May Provide Prophylaxis against HPV Associated Oropharyngeal Cancers in Both Males and Females January 30, 2010. Jorma Jyrkkanen

Gardacil May Provide Prophylaxis against HPV Associated Oropharyngeal Cancers in Both Males and Females January 30, 2010 Gardacil May Provide Prophylaxis against HPV Associated Oropharyngeal Cancers in Both Males and Females 29 January 2010 Because HPV(16-mostly) has now been associated with some proportion of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas it follows that like the case for cervical cancers, prophylaxis might provide immunity from HPV induced carcinogenesis. While Gardacil might not provide protection against cancers caused by kissing disease infectious mononucleosis (EBV) viruses originated nasopharyngeal cancers it might work with HPV oropharyngeal cancers, it does suggest the same avenue for prevention, ie: immune prophylaxis. I suggest we give boys as well as girls, prophylaxis against both EBV and HPV viral induced cancers of the head, neck, nose and throat region. Large number of life time partners in vaginal sex and oral sex had high associations with oropharyngeal cancers in a study reported in the NEJM (http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/356/19/1944). In the absence of prophylaxis lifestyle choices and reducing the number of sexual partners should reduce the overall risk of these acquired viral induced cancers. Copyright 2010 Jorma Jyrkkanen. All rights reserved (except NEJM content). Tags: Gardacil, cancers, head and neck, HPV, oropharyngeal, prophylaxis, EBV, pediatrics, Jorma Jyrkkanen

Just Released Docs Show Monsanto 'Executives Colluding With Corrupted EPA Officials to Manipulate Scientific Data'. Repost Copy

Just Released Docs Show Monsanto 'Executives Colluding With Corrupted EPA Officials to Manipulate Scientific Data' U.S. Right to Know Aug. 01, 2017 08:58AM EST Popular Just Released Docs Show Monsanto 'Executives Colluding With Corrupted EPA Officials to Manipulate Scientific Data' By Carey Gillam Four months after the publication of a batch of internal Monsanto Co. documents stirred international controversy, a new trove of company records was released early Tuesday, providing fresh fuel for a heated global debate over whether or not the agricultural chemical giant suppressed information about the potential dangers of its Roundup herbicide and relied on U.S. regulators for help. More than 75 documents, including intriguing text messages and discussions about payments to scientists, were posted for public viewing early Tuesday morning by attorneys who are suing Monsanto on behalf of people alleging Roundup caused them or their family members to become ill with non-Hodgkin lymphoma, a type of blood cancer. The attorneys posted the documents, which total more than 700 pages, on the website for the law firm Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman, one of many firms representing thousands of plaintiffs who are pursuing claims against Monsanto. More than 100 of those lawsuits have been consolidated in multidistrict litigation in federal court in San Francisco, while other similar lawsuits are pending in state courts in Missouri, Delaware, Arizona and elsewhere. The documents, which were obtained through court-ordered discovery in the litigation, are also available as part of a long list of Roundup court case documents compiled by the consumer group I work for, U.S. Right to Know. It was important to release the documents now because they not only pertain to the ongoing litigation, but also to larger issues of public health and safety, while shedding light on corporate influence over regulatory bodies, according to Baum Hedlund attorneys Brent Wisner and Pedram Esfandiary. "This is a look behind the curtain," said Wisner. "These show that Monsanto has deliberately been stopping studies that look bad for them, ghostwriting literature and engaging in a whole host of corporate malfeasance. They [Monsanto] have been telling everybody that these products are safe because regulators have said they are safe, but it turns out that Monsanto has been in bed with U.S. regulators while misleading European regulators." Esfandiary said public dissemination of the documents is important because regulatory agencies cannot properly protect public and environmental health without having accurate, comprehensive and impartial scientific data, and the documents show that has not been the case with Monsanto's Roundup herbicide and the active ingredient glyphosate. When reached for comment, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., one of the plaintiffs' lawyers said, "This trove marks a turning point in Monsanto's corporate life. They show Monsanto executives colluding with corrupted EPA officials to manipulate and bury scientific data to kill studies when preliminary data threatened Monsanto's commercial ambitions, bribing scientists and ghostwriting their publications, and purchasing peer review to conceal information about Roundup's carcinogenicity, its toxicity, its rapid absorption by the human body, and its horrendous risks to public health and the environment." "We can now prove that all Monsanto's claims about glyphosate's safety were myths concocted by amoral propaganda and lobbying teams," Kennedy continued. "Monsanto has been spinning its lethal yarn to everybody for years and suborning various perjuries from regulators and scientists who have all been lying in concert to American farmers, landscapers and consumers. It's shocking no matter how jaded you are! These new revelations are commensurate with the documents that brought down big tobacco." Several of the document discuss a lack of robust testing of formulated Roundup products. In one email, Monsanto scientist Donna Farmer writes "you cannot say that Roundup is not a carcinogen ... we have not done the necessary testing on the formulation to make that statement. The testing on the formulations are not anywhere near the level of the active ingredient." The release of the documents Tuesday came without the blessing of Judge Vince Chhabria, who is overseeing the multidistrict litigation moving its way through the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. In March, Chhabria did agree to unseal several other discovery documents—over Monsanto's objections—and those documents prompted a wave of outrage for what they revealed: questionable research practices by Monsanto, cozy ties to a top official within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and indications that Monsanto may have engaged in "ghostwriting," of research studies that appeared to be independent of the company. The revelations within those documents prompted an investigation by the EPA's Office of Inspector General into possible Monsanto-EPA collusion, and roiled Europe where regulators now are trying to decide whether or not to reauthorize glyphosate, which is the most widely used herbicide in the world and is found in numerous products in addition to Roundup. The lawyers said they are sending copies of the documents to European authorities, to the EPA's OIG and to the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), which has been sued by Monsanto for moving to list glyphosate as a known carcinogen Monsanto has fought to keep most of the documents it turned over in discovery sealed, complaining to Judge Chhabria that in several court filings plaintiffs' attorneys presented discovery materials out of context and tried to exploit the information to influence public opinion. Chhabria has both chided Monsanto for trying to improperly seal certain documents and warned plaintiffs' attorneys against unfairly publicizing certain documents. It is unclear how Judge Chhabria will react, if at all, to the law firm's release of these more than 75 documents. Baum Hedlund attorneys said they notified Monsanto on June 30 of their intent to unveil the 75+ documents and gave Monsanto the legally required 30-day window to formally object. That period expired Monday, clearing the way for them to make the release early Tuesday, said Wisner. Concerns about the safety of glyphosate and Roundup have been growing for years amid mounting research showing links to cancer or other diseases. But the lawsuits only began to accumulate after the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in 2015 classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen. The plaintiffs in the lawsuits allege that the combination of glyphosate with certain surfactants used in Monsanto-branded Roundup products is even more toxic than glyphosate alone, and Monsanto has sought to cover up that information. Monsanto has publicly denied that there are cancer connections to glyphosate or Roundup and said 40 years of research and scrutiny by regulatory agencies around the world confirm its safety. Monsanto has made billions of dollars a year for decades from its glyphosate-based herbicides, and they are the linchpin to billions of dollars more it makes each year from the genetically engineered glyphosate-tolerant crops it markets. The company is currently moving toward a planned merger with Bayer AG.

How Monsanto Captured the EPA (And Twisted Science) To Keep Glyphosate on the Market. See my Study.

Our Finding of Carcinogen 1,4-dioxane in Glyphosate herbicide, Vision Jan. 18th, 2012 at 11:49 AM. Jorma Jyrkkanen See my Finding in 1989. Since 1973, Monsanto has cited dubious science, like tests on the uteri of male mice, and the EPA has let much of it slide. Valerie Brown and Elizabeth Grossman Illustrations by Jean-Luc Bonifay November 1, 2017 | Special Investigation | November 2017 Issue In April 2014, a small grassroots group called Moms Across America announced that it had tested 10 breast milk samples for glyphosate, and found the chemical in three of them. Glyphosate is the world’s most widely used herbicide and the primary ingredient of Roundup. Although the levels of glyphosate found by Moms Across America were below the safety limits the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has set for drinking water and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has set for food, the results caused a stir on social media. The Moms Across America testing was not part of any formal scientific study, but Monsanto—the owner of the Roundup trademark and the premier glyphosate manufacturer—jumped to defend its most profitable pesticide based on a new study that found no glyphosate in breast milk. But this research, purported to be “independent,” was actually backed by the corporation itself. “Anybody who finds out about this is not going to trust a chemical company over a mom, even if [that mom] is a stranger,” says Moms Across America founder Zen Honeycutt. “A mother’s only special interest is the well-being of her family and her community.” Honeycutt says she has been sharply criticized for the breast milk project because it was not a formal scientific study. But she says her intention was “to find out whether or not glyphosate was getting in our breast milk, and if it was, to have further scientific studies conducted and therefore to provoke a movement so that policies would be changed.” Everyone is exposed to glyphosate: Residues of the herbicide are found in both fresh and processed foods, and in drinking water nationwide. More and more research suggests that glyphosate exposure can lead to numerous health issues, ranging from non-Hodgkin lymphoma and kidney damage to disruption of gut bacteria and improper hormone functioning. The Moms Across America episode fits a pattern that has emerged since 1974, when the EPA first registered glyphosate for use: When questions have been raised about the chemical’s safety, Monsanto has ensured that the answers serve its financial interests, rather than scientific accuracy and transparency. Our two-year investigation found incontrovertible evidence that Monsanto has exerted deep influence over EPA decisions since glyphosate first came on the market—via Roundup—more than 40 years ago. We have closely examined the publicly available archive of EPA documents from the earliest days of the agency’s consideration of glyphosate. Significant portions of the relevant documents have either been partially redacted or omitted entirely. But this archived material reveals that EPA staff scientists, who found much of the data submitted by Monsanto unacceptable, did place great weight upon a 1983 mouse study that showed glyphosate was carcinogenic. From the November issue of the new In These Times. In April 2015, in the wake of news that the Department of Health and Human Services was going to examine glyphosate, Dan Jenkins, a Monsanto executive, reported to his colleagues that Jess Rowland, a deputy director in the EPA Office of Pesticide Programs, had told him, “If I can kill this, I should get a medal.” Yet their interpretation was subsequently reversed by EPA upper management and advisory boards, apparently under pressure from Monsanto. In years to come, that pivotal 1983 mouse study would be buried under layers of misleading analysis to obscure its meaning. Today, the EPA and Monsanto continue to cite that study as evidence that glyphosate poses no public health risk, even though the study’s actual evidence indicates otherwise. Meanwhile, the EPA has overlooked a growing body of research suggesting glyphosate is dangerous. In March 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) determined that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic to humans” based on multiple peer-reviewed studies published since 2001. But the EPA has not changed its classification. Instead, the agency issued a rebuttal in September 2016 that said its scientists “did not agree with IARC”—and cited that 1983 mouse study as evidence of non-carcinogenicity. Controversy continues to swirl around EPA management’s cozy relationship with Monsanto. The agency’s Office of Inspector General, an independent oversight body, is currently investigating whether a former deputy director in the EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs, Jess Rowland, colluded with Monsanto to “kill” a Department of Health and Human Services investigation into glyphosate prompted by the release of the IARC report. On April 28, 2015, Dan Jenkins, a Monsanto regulatory affairs manager, emailed his colleagues that Rowland had told him, “If I can kill this, I should get a medal.” In the meantime, people across the country are suing Monsanto, alleging that their health problems and the deaths of their loved ones are connected to glyphosate. At least 1,100 such cases are wending their way through state courts, and an additional 240 through federal courts. To understand how we got to this point, we must examine how this four-decade-old dam of selective interpretation and industry interference—that is now leaking badly—was methodically assembled. Glyphosate use explodes In 1974, 1.4 million pounds of glyphosate were sprayed across U.S. farm and ranchland. By 2014, 276 million pounds were applied. Glyphosate use began to mushroom in the 1990s when the USDA approved Monsanto’s request to market corn, soy and cotton seeds that had been genetically engineered to resist Roundup. In the United States, the EPA has registered glyphosate for use on more than 100 crops, including wheat, rice, oats, barley and alfalfa. In California alone in 2015, more than 11 million pounds of glyphosate were used on crops, including almonds, avocados, cantaloupes, oranges, grapes and pistachios. In the wake of the IARC classification, this past March, California labeled glyphosate a carcinogen under the state’s Proposition 65 program, which requires businesses to notify consumers of carcinogenic chemicals in their products. Monsanto has fought this in court but so far has not prevailed. Glyphosate is used worldwide, in more than 160 countries. In 2015, Monsanto’s sales of pesticides reportedly brought in $4.76 billion—much of it fueled by the sales of glyphosate used on fields planted with the company’s glyphosate-resistant GMO seeds like Roundup Ready Soybeans. While the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) regularly measures Americans’ blood and urine for more than 200 industrial chemicals (including pesticides), glyphosate is not among those tracked. The USDA has declined to test for glyphosate in food products, but the FDA recently restarted its program monitoring glyphosate in food, although its data is not yet available. In the absence of good government data, various nongovernmental organizations have commissioned testing of food for the herbicide’s residues. The most recent such testing, by Food Democracy Now, found glyphosate in Honey Nut Cheerios, Ritz crackers, Oreos, Doritos and Lay’s potato chips. Previous European tests have found residues in bread and beer. Monsanto writes the regulations In the 1970s, the pesticide landscape was far different from today’s. Many more very toxic compounds were on the market, including toxaphene (banned in 1990), endrin (banned in 1986) and chlordane (banned in 1988). In contrast, glyphosate appeared to be nontoxic. Regulators assumed that because glyphosate worked on a metabolic pathway found only in plants, it would be harmless to humans. The EPA was only four years old when glyphosate entered the market in 1974, and the agency was faced with a large collection of chemicals to review. At the time, protocols for toxicology testing were relatively fluid, and it took the EPA until 1986 to finalize its guidelines. Yet the EPA’s analysis of glyphosate still relies heavily on the initial data. The earliest example we have found of Monsanto attempting to reduce the perception of glyphosate toxicity is from May 1973, the year before glyphosate was registered. That was when biologist Robert D. Coberly at the EPA’s Toxicology Branch (TB) Registration Division recommended that, due to the herbicide’s tendency to cause eye irritation, the word “Danger” should appear on the label of a Roundup formulation Monsanto was seeking to register. In November 1973, Monsanto senior staffer L.H. Hannah wrote a letter to the EPA that—as TB staff described in a memo to the Registration Division—“protested our recommendation” that “Danger” appear on the product label. The TB staff wrote that Monsanto suggested the eye irritation observed in the testing was caused by “a secondary infection in previously irritated eyes,” rather than the herbicide. EPA staff were reluctant to back down, but Monsanto persisted. The entire correspondence is not available, but in January 1976 Monsanto asked to have the “signal” word on the label changed from “Danger” to “Caution.” In June 1976, the EPA agreed to Monsanto’s request. Garbage in, garbage out Throughout the 1970s, EPA staff repeatedly raised red flags about the inadequacy of testing data that Monsanto was submitting in support of glyphosate’s original registration. For example, in an August 1978 memo, TB scientist Krystyna Locke raised concerns about a Monsanto study in which the scientists from the contract lab had failed to record what happened in the experiment. Locke quoted Monsanto scientist Robert Roudabush, who defended the study this way: “The scientific integrity of a study should not be doubted because of the inability to observe all primary recording of data.” In other words, the EPA should not be concerned by the absence of data. It should simply trust the study’s conclusions. The EPA’s Locke also pointed out that it is “difficult not to doubt the scientific integrity of a study when the [lab] stated that it took specimens from the uteri (of male rabbits).” (A male rabbit does not have a uterus.) This is only the most egregious example of the unreliable data made available to the EPA during its original regulatory review in the 1970s. Many other EPA memos we examined detail incomplete or otherwise unacceptable toxicology screening tests. Conversely, one apparently valid study has been the target of major attempts to discredit it by both EPA management and Big Ag. In 1983, the EPA was continuing to examine glyphosate toxicity data supplied by Monsanto in anticipation of the registration review that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) requires for each pesticide at least every 15 years. As part of that process, Monsanto submitted to the EPA a two-year mouse feeding study—a study that has since become a thorn in Monsanto’s side and a drag on the EPA’s push to find glyphosate benign. Its history merits close scrutiny. The mouse study was conducted for Monsanto by a commercial lab called Bio/Dynamics, but the results of the research were neither peer-reviewed nor made publicly available. Bio/Dynamics studied 200 mice: 50 unexposed control mice and three groups of 50 mice exposed to three different doses of glyphosate. Four of the exposed mice—one at the middle dose and three at the highest dose—developed kidney tumors called adenomas, which tend to be initially benign but can transform into cancers. Staff toxicologists, pathologists and statisticians in the TB provided the first interpretation of these results. On March 4, 1985, an ad hoc committee of these scientists reported that based on this mouse study, glyphosate was carcinogenic, or a “Class C” substance. They did not question the 1983 study’s structure or reported data. EPA staff toxicologist William Dykstra, in an April 3, 1985, memo, stated unequivocally, “Glyphosate was oncogenic in male mice causing renal tubule adenomas, a rare tumor, in a dose-related manner.” Outside experts The TB scientists recommended further expert analysis, so in the fall of 1985 Monsanto recruited four outside pathologists to review the original tissue slides from the 1983 study and—eventually—fresh slides taken from the same animals used in that original study. In a March 11, 1986, memo, Dykstra reported on the results of this review: One of the outside pathologists, Marvin Kuschner, saw a tumor in the control group of mice like those found in the exposed groups. Based on this finding, the EPA decided to discount the entire study on the grounds that if an unexposed control mouse had a tumor, the tumors in the exposed mice were “not compound-related.” Subsequent evaluation of the same evidence by other pathologists found no evidence of a tumor in the control mouse, but the seeds of doubt had already been sown. As late as 2016 the EPA still mentioned the tumor in the control mouse, although it was not there. Dissatisfied with the first outside experts’ verdict, the EPA asked another five outside pathologists to look at the mouse tissue slides from that study. According to a March 1, 1986, memo from EPA Hazard Evaluation Division toxicologist D. Stephen Saunders, these experts decided that “the incidences of renal tubular-cell neoplasms in this study are not compound-related”—in other words, that the kidney tumors were not related to glyphosate exposure. Throughout this process, the EPA was riddled with internal dissent. In February 1985, TB statistician Herbert Lacayo wrote an impassioned memo regarding the 1983 mouse study. He concluded that without glyphosate exposure, the odds of seeing the kidney tumors noted in the study were about 156 to 1. “Under such circumstances a prudent person would reject the Monsanto assumption that glyphosate dosing has no effect on kidney tumor production,” wrote Lacayo. “Our viewpoint is one of protecting the public health when we see suspicious data. It is not our job to protect registrants from false positives.” PassÉ Toxicology Monsanto’s interests were protected by a toxicological tenet that held sway at the time: the linear dose-response. This assumes that the greater the dose of a toxic substance, the greater the effects, and vice versa, often phrased as “the dose makes the poison.” Under this assumption, a carcinogenicity test would be expected to show tumor size or tumor numbers increasing in linear relation to increased exposure to the carcinogen. In the mouse study, tumor numbers followed this pattern, which the TB noted was an indication that the tumors were glyphosate-related. But the largest tumor was found in one of the middle-dose mice. Pathologist Robert A. Squire, a member of the first outside group consulted, wrote in a September 1985 letter to Monsanto, “This would be highly unlikely if the tumors were compound-related.” Thus, even though the tumor numbers followed a linear dose-response, the tumor size of the middle-dose mouse presented an opportunity to discount glyphosate’s effects as non-linear and therefore nonexistent. In some circumstances, the linear dose-response reasoning makes sense, but the science of chemical health effects has advanced considerably since the 1980s. It is now generally accepted among academic researchers that non-linear dose-responses—responses in which low levels of exposure may produce more significant effects than high levels and responses in which effects at high doses sometimes plateau or tail off—often occur. None of the regulatory studies of glyphosate considers the possibility of non-linear dose-responses. The registration documents submitted by Monsanto show that when glyphosate testing data did not conform to the linear dose-response model, the company’s hired scientists and the EPA’s consultants concluded that adverse effects found in exposed animals were not caused by glyphosate. But this outdated approach underlines why glyphosate’s toxicity should be revisited using modern concepts and methods. After a decade of EPA staff scientists repeatedly flagging inconsistencies, mistakes and questionable scientific interpretations in Monsanto’s data, one might expect the EPA to require rigorous new studies. Instead, the agency continued to invite outside experts to review the data, as though it was determined to ask the same question until it got the answer it was looking for. Don’t like the answer? Ask again. In early 1986, the EPA called in yet more outside experts—namely, the agency’s FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel. The seven-member panel included the head of biochemical toxicology and pathobiology at the Chemical Industry Institute of Toxicology (CIIT). This institute was founded by chemical manufacturers and funded by organizations and companies that included the American Chemistry Council (an industry group that boasts Monsanto as a member), and pesticide manufacturers BASF, Bayer and Dow Chemical. The panel also included a consultant who had worked for the ChemAgro Corporation (later part of Bayer’s agricultural division) before founding her own consultancy. The FIFRA panel felt that calling glyphosate carcinogenic was going too far and suggested downgrading its classification to D, “not classified.” Biostatistician Christopher Portier, formerly a director of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (part of the Department of Health and Human Services) says the agency should have stuck with the TB ad hoc committee’s original interpretation. Of the FIFRA panel, he says, “I have no clue how they got there.” At the same time, according to a February 1985 summary memo by Stephen L. Saunders, based on the panel’s advice, “The Agency has determined that the existing mouse study does not provide sufficient evidence for a resolution of this issue. Therefore, a repeat mouse study is required.” Despite the EPA’s requests for a clarifying experiment, Monsanto apparently refused. Monsanto’s registration director George B. Fuller protested vigorously in an Oct. 5, 1988, letter to the director of the EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs, Edwin F. Tinsworth. “[There is] no relevant scientific or regulatory justification for repeating the glyphosate mouse oncogenicity study,” Fuller wrote. “We feel that to do so would not be an appropriate use of either the Agency’s or Monsanto’s resources.” In a 1988 meeting, the company again pressed the EPA to give up on the repeat mouse study requirement. The EPA backed down. To our knowledge, the original 1983 mouse-feeding carcinogenicity study was never repeated. What is clear from available EPA internal records is that when test results suggest toxicity, EPA management—as opposed to EPA staff scientists—consistently gives Monsanto and its testing laboratories the benefit of the doubt. They defer to Monsanto’s preferred conclusions instead of requiring the development of additional evidence that would clarify the questions regarding glyphosate’s carcinogenicity. The documents we have examined indicate that the EPA may have asked for—or intended to enforce a requirement for—better data, but we have seen nothing to show that the agency ever did so. The EPA did not respond to our request for comment. Despite these omissions and questions, in June 1991, the EPA announced that it was downgrading glyphosate from a “Class D”—“not classifiable” substance—to a “Class E” substance—“one that shows evidence of non-carcinogenicity for humans—based on the lack of convincing evidence in adequate studies.” (Note that this implies adequate studies might still provide convincing evidence.) IARC awakens regulators After the EPA reregistered glyphosate in 1993, the agency’s investigation of glyphosate’s potential health effects became more or less dormant until controversy erupted when the World Health Organization’s IARC concluded in 2015 that glyphosate was “probably carcinogenic to humans.” That in turn prompted the EPA to develop its Fall 2016 “Glyphosate Issue Paper.” This document references the 1983 mouse study as a linchpin in its conclusion that glyphosate is not a human carcinogen. Referring to the 1983 study, the EPA wrote, “The additional pathological and statistical evaluations concluded that the renal tumors in male mice were not compound-related.” For its part, Monsanto called the IARC review “flawed” and accused the IARC committee of cherry-picking and overlooking data. Monsanto demanded the report’s retraction. In an 1985 memo, an EPA Toxicology Branch statistician wrote, “Our viewpoint is one of protecting the public health when we see suspicious data. It is not our job to protect registrants from false positives.” In a September 27 email to In These Times, Monsanto spokesperson Charla Lord stressed that IARC is not a regulatory agency and that “no regulatory agency in the world has concluded glyphosate is a carcinogen.” As noted above, however, the California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Health Hazard Assessment has done so. The IARC controversy and the EPA’s second re-registration process for glyphosate, which began in 2009, have triggered a salvo of scientific journal articles and comments from the agricultural industry. This includes an entire toxicology journal issue devoted to articles (all financed by Monsanto) asserting glyphosate safety and casting doubt on contrary results. The apparent goal of these comments and articles is to discredit the IARC decision and to influence the EPA’s re-registration process. Judging by the stance of the EPA’s “Glyphosate Issue Paper,” the campaign has succeeded. The EPA has not commissioned or conducted any of its own studies to examine glyphosate’s potential health effects; rather, the EPA document relies on non-public industry research and industry-financed reviews. It ignores the significant body of peer-reviewed literature not only on the chemical’s carcinogenic effects, but also on glyphosate’s harmful effects on fetal development, hormonal balance, gut bacteria and ecological balance. Indeed, the industry reviews are not simply convenient collations of relevant literature for the EPA—the agency appears to rely on the interpretations and conclusions of the industry-financed scientists as well, in some cases without seeing the original studies. In comments submitted to the FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel on Nov. 3, 2016, Natural Resources Defense Council senior scientist Jennifer Sass stated: NRDC strongly disagrees with EPA’s dismissal or reduced weighting of many of the positive studies, and its higher weighting of guideline studies which are most often the industry-sponsored studies generated to support regulatory approval. NRDC is especially concerned that EPA relied on a review article—particularly one sponsored by the industries whose products are the target of this risk assessment—instead of the original studies. John DeSesso, a principal with the chemical consultancy Exponent, insists the studies and reviews the EPA relied on are solid. “Certainly they relied on those studies, but they happen to be the better studies that are out there,” DeSesso says. “I understand people saying of course it came out a certain way because Monsanto paid for it.” He adds, “If it went to the EPA, they don’t have the people to do it or the time to do it themselves. So they’re looking for people staying in the middle of the road and let the data tell the story.” Yet two facts remain: First, the EPA failed to consider the large body of peer-reviewed science on glyphosate currently available. Second, neither the public nor the scientific community has access to the original study data from Monsanto upon which the EPA bases its claims of glyphosate’s safety. Safe as mother’s milk In July 2015, five months after IARC concluded that glyphosate was carcinogenic, Monsanto reacted publicly to Moms Across America’s 2014 breast milk survey. The company’s response to this small nonprofit organization parallels its lobbying of a federal agency over the last 40 years, demonstrating that it will seek to discredit all opposition no matter how small. It aggressively and publicly sowed doubt as it manipulated the science behind the scenes. The first public salvo against Moms Across America came in a July 2015 press release from Washington State University (WSU). WSU biology professor Michelle McGuire was quoted as saying, “The Moms Across America study flat out got it wrong.” The release, which is no longer available at the WSU web site, explained that yet-to-be-published research by McGuire and her colleagues showed that glyphosate “does not accumulate in mother’s milk.” The WSU release described McGuire’s results as “independently verified by an accredited outside organization.” These assertions turned out to be false. When asked about the study at the time, McGuire, WSU and Monsanto all said the study was conducted independently. Yet the press release noted that the study’s milk samples were tested at Monsanto’s laboratories in St. Louis, as well as by Covance, Inc. (The company was formerly named Hazleton, which was doing toxicology testing for Monsanto as early as 1979.) When we queried about this in July 2015, McGuire and Monsanto explained that Monsanto had developed the test method used to measure glyphosate in human milk. Asked why the company had developed the test method, Monsanto explained via email that McGuire’s study had, in fact, been conducted in response to Moms Across America’s test results. The Monsanto spokesman wrote: “After the Moms Across America results were posted, Monsanto consulted with the researchers about the data. We all determined that the most appropriate way to address the issues was to conduct another analysis using an analytical methodology that was validated to be precise and specific for the detection of glyphosate in human milk.” In a September 25 Biology Fortified, Inc. YouTube video, McGuire said the study had “a conflict of interest that needed to be managed really, really carefully.” As the most specific example of such careful management, she said that in order to “make sure we had an independent or third-party lab analyze the samples,” the samples were shipped “directly to Covance so it was not like we were going through Monsanto.” Given the close ties between Covance and Monsanto, and Monsanto’s role in devising the study and developing the analytical method, McGuire’s description of the analysis as “independent” is something of a stretch. In March 2016, the WSU study was published by the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. The study’s acknowledgements detail extensive support from Monsanto: Three of the study’s nine authors are listed as Monsanto employees. Research “gifts” of $10,000 are disclosed from Monsanto to McGuire and her co-author (and husband) Mark McGuire, in addition to the study costs for which Monsanto reimbursed the McGuires. The study’s biological sample testing (milk and urine) was paid for by Monsanto, and the company was involved in other aspects of the study design and assay development. Curiously, even though the authors included Michelle and Mark McGuire, the study footnotes also say that “the authors reported no funding received for this study” and that authors not employed by Monsanto reported no conflicts of interest related to the study. Further undermining claims of the study’s independence is the fact that the journal that published McGuire’s study is copyrighted to the American Society of Nutrition, of which Monsanto—along with numerous other agricultural and food manufacturing corporations—is a “sustaining partner.” Michelle McGuire is listed in her university bio as an American Society of Nutrition spokesperson. Phil Weller, a WSU spokesperson, says university scientists like McGuire “are encouraged to collaborate with researchers working in industry” and “to design their studies in such a way that any sort of bias that might be involved does not influence their results.” Back to the Future When glyphosate was first registered, it no doubt appeared benign compared to very toxic compounds that had been used as pesticides for decades. But glyphosate usage has ballooned beyond all expectations and, more than four decades later, we have no clear understanding of the consequences of this increased exposure on humans and the environment. The EPA’s regulatory record on glyphosate is compromised by missing, incomplete, hidden, redacted, lost and otherwise faulty information. The EPA relies on data, most of which is unpublished, that is supplied by the manufacturer, interpreted by the industry and not publicly available. Consequently, a decisive and transparent assessment of glyphosate’s toxicity is impossible. The EPA has never wavered from its decision to dismiss and minimize the 1983 mouse study, which appears to be valid. The agency has never attempted to replicate the study in order to clarify its results—perhaps because it feared that such evidence would demonstrate that glyphosate was indeed a carcinogen. Furthermore, it’s a pattern the agency continues to follow, discounting later studies using similar arguments and research supplied by industry that have not undergone independent analysis. Neither the public nor the scientific community has access to the original study data from Monsanto upon which the EPA bases its claims of glyphosate’s safety. “I gave [the EPA] the benefit of the doubt in 1986,” says Portier. “I don’t give them the benefit of the doubt in 2017.” Glyphosate is a clear case of “regulatory capture” by a corporation acting in its own financial interest while serious questions about public health remain in limbo. The record suggests that in 44 years—through eight presidential administrations—EPA management has never attempted to correct the problem. Indeed, the pesticide industry touts its forward-looking, modern technologies as it strives to keep its own research in the closet, and relies on questionable assumptions and outdated methods in regulatory toxicology. The only way to establish a scientific basis for evaluating glyphosate’s safety, as a group of 14 scientists suggested in 2016, would be to make proprietary industrial studies public, put them up against the peer-reviewed literature and conduct new studies by researchers independent of corporate interests—in other words, force some daylight between regulators and the regulated. As an independent, nonprofit publication, IN THESE TIMES depends on support from readers like you. Donate or subscribe to help fund independent journalism. Valerie Brown is a journalist specializing in environmental health, climate change and microbiology. In 2009 she was honored by the Society of Environmental Journalists for her writing on epigenetics. Elizabeth Grossman was an award-winning journalist specializing in science and environmental issues. She was the author of Chasing Molecules, High Tech Trash and other books. To the great sorrow of her colleagues and friends, Grossman died in July of ovarian cancer.

Impacts of Antibiotics on Heart Diseases March 19, 2021 Jorma Jyrkkanen

Impacts of Antibiotics on Heart Diseases March 19, 2021 Jorma Jyrkkanen, 2021-03-19, jormabio@hotmail.com ph: 250-859-5330 Background After reviewing the work of Sameer Calghatgi et al 2013 it became clear to me that the antibiotic production of ROS and Lipid Peroxide were the byproducts of antibiotics on mitochondria with potential CARDIOLOGY outcomes. From only a preliminary cursory examination of a few of the thousands of genes involved in heart function that are potentially impacted by ROS and LP I found the following potential routes for their impacts on heart and coronary artery diseases which need detailed and close examination with each and every antibiotic in use. I based the cardiology impacts on predictions arising from this work. https://www.heighpubs.org/jccm/pdf/jccm-aid1104.pdf 1. Oxidative damage to DNA, membranes, lipids and proteins, alteration of gene expression 2. Lipid Peroxide 3. Rupture of mitochondria 4. Mutations in mitochondrial proteins and peptides 5. Mutation of heart function genes and probable epigenetic alteration of genes 6. Loss or damage to mitochondria integrity and reproduction essential for heart energy supply 7. Dysbiosis linked issues of pathogenic substances and signalling 8. Inflammation and athersclerosis 9. Damage associated molecular pattern molecules (DAMPs) that are released during condition of oxidative stress. 10. Redox stress leading to release of DAMPs triggering TLR4-mediated inflammation and organ injury. 11. Cardiovascular diseases associated with increases in IL-6, such as atherosclerosis and hypertension, are also associated with oxidative stress, particularly increases in vascular superoxide, suggesting a potential relationship between superoxide, IL-6 and arterial pressure. 12. Interleukin-6 (IL-6) has been emphasized by reports of elevated circulating as well as intracardiac IL-6 levels in patients with congestive heart failure (CHF). IL-6 may contribute to the progression of myocardial damage and dysfunction in chronic heart failure syndrome resulting from different causes 13. ROS at low concentrations have important functions in regulating pathways such as TNFR1 signaling, but high ROS concentrations ultimately lead to DNA damage and cell death. TNF modulates both cardiac contractility and peripheral resistance, the two most important haemodynamic determinants of cardiac function 14. DNA Damage Response/TP53 Pathway Is Activated and Contributes to the Pathogenesis of Dilated Cardiomyopathy Associated With LMNA (Lamin A/C) Mutations 15. Increased ROS generation and reduction in ATP level, contributing to ATP-producing disorders and oxidative stress, which may further accelerate development or vulnerability of atherosclerosis and myocardial ischemic injury 16. Dysregulated ROS production and oxidative stress have been implicated in a host of cardiac diseases, including cardiac hypertrophy, heart failure (HF), cardiac ischemia–reperfusion injury (IRI), and diabetic cardiomyopathy 17. HNE a breakdown product of LP can trigger cardiovascular pathology by inflammation. LP linked to atherogenesis. 18. Dysbiosis triggers immune depression opening door to pathogenic viruses, bacteria, microbial toxins which may also pose a risk to neurological intereference in vagal nerve signalling. 19. Depression of TP53 TSG function affects OP and ATP, antioxidant regulation and stability, programmed senescence 20. Epigenetic effects on cardiology important genes undetermined. Ex; Silencing, turning on when not supposed to, over expression Reference Bactericidal Antibiotics Induce Mitochondrial Dysfunction and Oxidative Damage in Mammalian Cells By Sameer Kalghatgi, Catherine S. Spina, James C. Costello, Marc Liesa, J. Ruben Morones-Ramirez, Shimyn Slomovic, Anthony Molina, Orian S. Shirihai, James J. Collins. Science Translational Medicine03 Jul 2013 : 192ra85. Mitochondrial dysfunction and oxidative damage induced by bactericidal antibiotics in mammalian cells may be alleviated by an antioxidant or prevented by preferential use of bacteriostatic antibiotics. Tags: antibiotics, cardiology, heart disease, lipid peroxides, loss of ATP, mitochondria, ROS

Antibiotic induced changes to mitochondria result in potential contributions to carcinogenesis, heart pathologies, other medical conditions and ecosystem risksJorma Jyrkkanen*British Columbia, CanadaMore Information *Address for Correspondence: Jorma Jyrkkanen, British Columbia, Canada, Tel:1-250-859-5330; Email: jormabio@hotmail.com Submitted: 17 August 2020

https://www.heighpubs.org/jccm163https://doi.org/10.29328/journal.jccm.1001104Research ArticleAntibiotic induced changes to mitochondria result in potential contributions to carcinogenesis, heart pathologies, other medical conditions and ecosystem risksJorma Jyrkkanen*British Columbia, CanadaMore Information *Address for Correspondence: Jorma Jyrkkanen, British Columbia, Canada, Tel:1-250-859-5330; Email: jormabio@hotmail.com Submitted: 17 August 2020Approved: 01 October 2020Published: 02 October 2020How to cite this article:Jyrkkanen J. Antibiotic induced changes to mitochondria result in potential contributions to carcinogenesis, heart pathologies, other medical conditions and ecosystem risks. J Cardiol Cardiovasc Med. 2020; 5: 163-171. DOI: 10.29328/journal.jccm.1001104Copyright: © 2020 Jyrkkanen J. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.Keywords: Antibiotic; Mitochondria; DNA damage; P53 tumor suppressor cene; Mutp53; ROS; Lipid peroxide; Cell perforation; Cell rupture; Oxidative phosphorylation; Cancer; Carcinogenesis; Glycolysis; Warburg eff ect; Microbiome; Dysbiosis; Immune suppression; Pesticides; Mechanism; Clastogenic; Epigenetic silencing; Microrna; DNA; HeartOPEN ACCESSAbstract With the discovery by Calghatgi (2013) that three common antibiotics (Abs) increased mitochondrial reactive oxygen (ROS) and lipid peroxide (LP) and depleted their natural absorbant glutathione led me to investigate further the potential impacts of these genotoxic substances on carcinogenesis. The range of impacts on mitochondria and cellular DNA varied by antibiotic to those consistent with known prior contributions to carcinogenesis. Specifi c cancers probably increased by these changes were HCC, RCC (KCC), CRC, cancer of the esophagus. Tumor suppressor gene mutations resulting from LP were noteworthy in this regard and mutations induced in CRC were consistent with those found in carcinogenesis of CRC. In addition depression of short chain fatty acids in microbiomes were found which depress the immune system increasing risk of all cancers. Many cancers were increased according to epidemiological studies linking Abs with elevated odds ratios, with one concern in particular, fatal breast cancer. The impact of loss of functionality of the mitochondria was also linked to depression of the citric acid cycle and therefore ATP which defl ected metabolism to glycolysis, the Warburg mechanism also increasing risk of all cancers, favoured by cancer cells. In conclusion, some portion of many cancer types are probably increased in likelihood by number, type and frequency of Abs treatment and chronic residue exposure which varies from individual to individual. This led me to propose a three pronged carcinogenesis mechanism for Abs. 1. Cancer critical mutations 2. Immune depression 3. loss of mitochondrial functionality leading to Warburg eff ects. Damage to mitochondria were also noted by common pesticides tested in China and cancer associations were also found for many pesticides supporting a similar contributory etiology. Heart health concerns were raised by these fi ndings because of the myriad mitochondria in the heart and because of long term reliability needs. Studies suggesting hearts were aff ected by Abs and pesticide exposure were presented. Because of their geographical ubiquitousness and the huge range of diseases associated with mitochondrial dysfunction, antibiotics and pesticides and bacteriocidal biocides are of concern for biodiversity and life in general. I propose research steps to evaluate Abs safety and suggest directions for further research and make suggestions on ways to ameliorate Abs toxicity.IntroductionAntibiotics kill or slow the growth of bacteria or interfere in their reproduction. The mitochondria, an ancient alpha-proteobacteria [Rickettseae] that has become an endosymbiont in higher life forms with critical functions, response to them has been found to be a decrease of beneβicial antioxidant glutathione, increased reactive oxygen, increased harmful lipid peroxide, possible DNA damage and mutations in tumour suppressor genes increasing cancer risk, possible inability to reproduce, possible cell perforation and or rupture. Some antibiotics have been shown in the past to be clastogenic. These types of responses have broad biochemical and health implications. They could lead to carcinogenisis, microbiome dysbiosis with resulting immune system depression and or loss of oxidative phosphorylation (OP) favouring glycolysis metabolism which is also the favoured method for cancer cells. Changes could enhance the Warburg effect favouring cancers. P53 genes may be turned off epigenetically at the DNA. Defective mitochondria have been implicated in over Antibiotic induced changes to mitochondria result in potential contributions to carcinogenesis, heart pathologies, other medical conditions and ecosystem riskshttps://www.heighpubs.org/jccm164https://doi.org/10.29328/journal.jccm.1001104200 medical conditions. In addition a big unknown is the relationship between which biocides may epigenetically shut down critical genes found with each particular kind of cancer. Clinical and epidemiological evidence supports the conclusion that some antibiotics are carcinogens, others promote cancers and cancer risk increases with frequency and type. Microbiome dysbiosis and immune depression risk is increased. While exposure may not complete all the steps to cancer it may contribute important mutations along the way. Other life time exposures can can complete the process. Chinese researchers recently found that a high proportion of common pesticides ruptured mitochondria like some antibiotics. Individuals who were exposed to pesticides were more than twice as likely overall to have conditions like heart disease, heart failure oran irregular rapid heartbeat known as atrial βibrillation [1]. It can be inferred that ruptured mitochondria from antibiotics would lead to similar coronary pathologies. There is reason to suspect that all Eukaryotes are subject to pathological impacts. The mitochondria enabled multicellular evolution to higher forms of life and is now under attack worldwide by anthropogenic biocide pollution. More research is needed to determine which of all biocides is mitochondria friendly, enables them to be fully functional without mutations, prior to regulatory approvals. I propose an antibiotic mitochondria carcinogenesis mechanism. For a general overview of impacts of antibiotics on total general physiology and health of ecosystems including plants see Wang, Xu et al. [2]. A criticism of some βindings is that people with cancer are more prone to infections and this can account for much of the association of antibiotics with cancer [3]. However the βinding of immune compromise is consistent with antibiotic induced microbiome associated dysbiosis.Mitochondrial job and creation of toxic mix by antibioticMitochondria, a primitive endosymbiotic bacteria, related to extant SARII marine bacteria and Rickettsias, in eukaryotes is responsible for OP resulting in ATP and NAD production for energy. When exposed to clinically equivalent doses of antibiotics that target bacteria (cipromycin, ampicillin, kanamycin), exhibited a decline in glutathione titre, an increase in reactive oxygen (ROS) and an increase in lipid peroxide with damage to DNA and potential mitochondrial rupture [4]. Tetracyclines used for humans and livestock have also been linked to mitochondrial genetic damage [5]. Some antibiotics have been found to be break chromosomes [6].Modes of action of antibiotics on mitochondria and microbiome1. quinolones- commonly prescribed antibacterial organoβluorine compounds which act by inhibition of bacterial DNA synthesis and result in rapid cell death [7]. This group contains oβloxacin, norβloxacin (noroxin), ciproβloxacin (Cipro), moxyβloxacin (Avelox). Expectation is to obstruct mitochondrial replication. Norβloxacin demonstrated a linear antibiotic-DNA mutation rate, compromised DNA oxidative damage repair and post replicative mismatch repair [8]. They could be expected to do similar collateral damage to mitochondria and to members of the human microbiome.2. aminoglycosides-ex gentamicin, amicasin which create holes in the outer cell wall of bacteria suggesting mitochondria and the microbiome might be at risk of similar damage [9]. Damage to lipid membranes can be expected. Lipid membranes have wide distribution in both microbes and other animals including humans.3. β-lactams or penicillin derivatives such as cephalosporins, monobactams, carbapenems, carbacephems inhibit cell wall synthesis in bacteria and by inference inhibit cell wall synthesis in mitochondria during division and repair and microbiomes thereby obstructing microbial reproduction. Penicillamine is listed as a ‘developmental’ in California Proposition 65.4. Tetracyclines-used on cattle and humans and possibly acquired secondarily as dietary residues may affect mitochondria because they speciβically target Rickettsias a probable evolutionary ancestor [2,10.11].5. Anthracyclines-result in clastogenicity [6].Harmful impact of liberated substances on DNA, P53 tumour suppressor gene, mutagenicity and known eff ects in other cancersGlutathione is an antioxidant that soaks up ROS and is essential for many neurological and other body functions. Glutathione is capable of preventing damage to important cellular components caused by reactive oxygen species such as free radicals, peroxides, lipid peroxides, and heavy metals.Genomic instability occurs in myeloid malignancies with increased reactive oxygen species ROS, DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) and error-prone repair [12].ROS linked to many cancers by oxidative DNA damage“numerous studies have shown generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) that can cause oxidative damage of DNA. This is a well-known mechanism in carcinogenesis for many agents” [13]. Excessive levels of ROS accumulation due to altered equilibrium between ROS and antioxidants may lead to different kinds of diseases such as atherosclerosis, diabetes, neurodegeneration, and cancer including CRC. It is widely known that ROS-induced DNA damages and genetic mutations are critical causes of cancers including CRC. The main intracellular DNA lesions caused by ROS are single and double strand DNA breaks, and the common genetic mutations include p53, KRAS, APC, and BRAF mutations often seen in CRC’s. For example, a direct relation among oxidative stress, DNA damage and elevated frequency of p53 mutation in CRC Antibiotic induced changes to mitochondria result in potential contributions to carcinogenesis, heart pathologies, other medical conditions and ecosystem riskshttps://www.heighpubs.org/jccm169https://doi.org/10.29328/journal.jccm.1001104Follow up researchTo resolve the safety of antibiotics (Abs) regarding their potential impact on mitochondrial impacts, I have arrived a number of research questions which can help steer our understanding and antibiotic futures. Independent academic institutional involvement is preferred so that vested interestsdon’t cloud the results.1. How large and persistent is the glutathione decrease, ROS and lipid peroxide increase post antibiotic treatment for each antibiotic if any?2. What effect do Abs have on future reproduction, integrity and populations of mitochondria in heart muscle.3. Need to survey and list genetic mutations and epigenetic alteration of cancer gene expression and especially cancer gene silencing post Abs treatment in DNA and microRNA.4. Assess dysbiosis linked impacts on immune system post Abs treatment and duration of the effect.5. Do a full analysis of coronary function and mitochondrial health post Abs for each Abs.6. Broad survey of Abs clastogenicity with complete description.7. Which Abs rupture mitochondria and or cells and at what concentrations?8. Assay 8-oxodG post Abs treatment to determine potential carcinogenicity?9. Do any Abs impact on promotion of hepatocellular carcinoma and CRC?10. Assay tumor suppressor epigenetic gene up-regulation, down-regulation, silencings and mutations and their loci for P53 and TUSC and TpMs.11. Conduct a population study for Abs usage and Breast Cancer with proper controls and examine BC associated genes [55] for mutations or epigenetic silencings post Abs treatments and relationship to exposure history.12. Assess OP and glycolysis potential of each Abs to determine potential for Warburg effect.13. Abs history study of HPV oropharyngeal cancers in men in developed countries.14. Abs impact on proteasome activity.15. Assay Abs for reverse Warburg activity for H1F(alpha) and FOS-JUN which stimulate cancer cell proliferation.16. Assay Abs treatment for caveolin 1 in adjacent stromal βibroblasts which increase mitophagy and lactate in βibroblastsdriving tumor growth and proliferation.17. Routine clinical assay for interstitial ATP titre recovery once antibiotic use is discontinued to see if the Warburg effect if initiated on application has been neutralized.I think this would clarify the scale and degree of impact of antibiotics and point to areas needing remedies. Many other diseases are linked to mitochondrial alterations. The reader is referred to Salvatore diMauro and Darryl C De Vivo book Diseases of Mitochondrial Metabolism. Basic Neurochemistry: Molecular, Cellular and Medical Aspects. 6th edition. Siegel GJ, Agranoff BW, Albers RW, et al. [39], editors. Philadelphia:Lippincott-Raven; 1999. Salvatore diMauro and Darryl C De Vivo.The most urgent in the light of growing antibiotic resistance are these two critical health questions, ie mitochondrial health relative to heart health and carcinogenicity contributions.References1. Lisa Rapaport. 2019. Health News January 9, 2019 / 3:30 PM/Reuters.2. Wang X, Dongreol R, Johan A. Antibiotic use and abuse: A threat to mitochondria and chloroplasts with impact on research, health, and environment. Bioessays. 2016. 37: 1045–1053. PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4698130/ 3. Zhang H, Rodríguez LAG, Hernández-Díaz S.. Antibiotic Use and the Risk of Lung Cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008; 17: 1308-1315. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18544646/ 4. Sameer C. Bactericidal antibiotics induce mitochondrial dysfunction and oxidative damage in mammalian cells. Sci Transl Med. 2013; 5: 192ra85. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23825301/ 5. Granados-Chinchilla F, Rodríguez C. Tetracyclines in Food and Feeding stuff s: From Regulation to Analytical Methods, Bacterial Resistance, and Environmental and Health Implications. J Analytical Methods Chem. 2017: 1315497. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28168081/ 6. Nersessian AK, Zilfi an Vrez N, Koumkoumadjian VA. Fanardjian.Inhibitory eff ect of rat immunization with tularemia vaccine on the in vivo clastogenicity of 4 anthracycline antibiotics. Mutation Research. 1991; 260: 215-218. 7. Aldre KJ, Kerns RJ, Neil O. Mechanism of Quinolone Action and Resistance. Biochemistry. 2014: 53: 1585-1574. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24576155/ 8. Long H, Miller SF, Strauss C, Zhao C, Cheng L, et al. Antibiotic treatment enhances the genome-wide mutation rate of target cells. PNAS. 2016; 113: E2498-E2505. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4983809/ Gonzalez L, Jianne P. Spencer. Aminoglycosides: A Practical Review Am Fam Physician. 1998; 15; 58:1811-1820. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9835856/ 9. Emelyanov VV. Evolutionary relationship of Rickettsiae and mitochondria. 2001; 501: 11-18. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11457448/ 10. Moullan N, et al. Tetracyclines Disturb Mitochondrial Function across Eukaryotic Models: A Call for Caution in Biomedical Research.” Cell reports. 2015; 10: 1681-1691. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25772356/ 11. Sallmyr A, Feyruz JF, Rassool V. Genomic instability in myeloid malignancies: Increased reactive oxygen species (ROS), DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) and error-prone repair. Cancer Letters. 2008; 270: 1-9.PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18467025/ Antibiotic induced changes to mitochondria result in potential contributions to carcinogenesis, heart pathologies, other medical conditions and ecosystem riskshttps://www.heighpubs.org/jccm170https://doi.org/10.29328/journal.jccm.100110412. Hardell L, Carlberg M. Response to Ahlbom et al. Comments on Hardell and Carlberg Increasing Rates of Brian Tumors in the Swedish National Inpatient Register and the Causes of Death Register. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2015, 12, 3793–3813.13. Comments on ROS and P53 gene mutations. P53 non-ionizing radiation and heat linked specifi cally to p53 mutation involved in astrocytoma).14. Liu J, Du J, Zhang Y, Sun W, Smith BJ, et al. Redox Imbalance in the Development of Colorectal Cancer. J Cancer. 2017; 8:1586–1597. PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5535714/ 15. Gago-Dominguez M, Castelao JE, Lipid peroxidation and renal cell carcinoma: Further supportive evidence and new mechanistic insights. Free Radical Biology & Medicine. 2005; 40: 721-733. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16458203/ 16. Mufti SI, Nachiappan V, Eskelson CD. Ethanol-mediated promotion of oesophageal carcinogenesis: association with lipid peroxidation and changes in phospholipid fatty acid profi le of the target tissue. Alcohol and Alcoholism. 1997; 32:221–231.17. Martin OCB, Naud N, Taché S, Debrauwer L, Chevolleau S, et al. Targeting Colon Luminal Lipid Peroxidation Limits Colon Carcinogenesis Associated with Red Meat Consumption. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2018; 11:569-580. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29954759/ 18. Hu W, Feng Z, Eveleigh J, Iyer G, Pan J, et al. The major lipid peroxidation product, trans- 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal, preferentially forms DNA adducts at codon 249 of human p53 gene, a unique mutational hotspot in hepatocellular carcinoma, Carcinogenesis. 2002; 23: 1781–1789.PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12419825/ 19. Zhuo-Lin D, Ma Y. Afl atoxin suff erer and p53 gene mutation in hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol. 1998; 4: 28–29. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11819223/ 20. Zhang J, Orang’ O, Tonui P, Tong Y, Maina T, et al. Detection and Concentration of Plasma Afl atoxin Is Associated With Detection of Oncogenic Human Papillomavirus in Kenyan Women. Open Forum Infectious Diseases. 2019; 6: ofz354. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31392332/ 21. Skrzydlewska E, Sulkowski S, Koda M, Zalewski B, Kanczuga-Koda L, et al.. Lipid peroxidation and antioxidant status in colorectal cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2005; 11: 403–406. PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4205348/ 22. Jinchul K, Lili Y, Xuemei F, Yang X. WTP53 protein known as PUMA (acronym for “p53 upregulated modulator of apoptosis” caused switch from OP to glycolysis ie Warburg transition). UCLA. 2019. 23. Kathrin S, Keller S, Wolter FE, Röglin L, Beil W, et al. Proximicins A, B, and C—Antitumor Furan Analogues of Netropsin from the MarineActinomycete Verrucosispora Induce Upregulation of p5 3 and the Cyclin Kinase Inhibitor p21* Angew. Chem Int Ed. 2008; 47: 3258 –3261.PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18348121/ 24. Mantovani F, Collavin L. Del Sal G. Mutant p53 as a guardian of the cancer cell. Cell Death Diff er. 2019; 26: 199–212. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30538286/ 25. Liang Y, Liu J, Feng Z. The regulation of cellular metabolism by tumor suppressor p53. Cell & Bioscience. 2013; 3. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23388203/ 26. Bhaskaran N, Quigley C, Paw C, Butala S, Schneider E, et al. Role of Short Chain Fatty Acids in Controlling Tregs and Immunopathology During Mucosal Infection. Front Microbiol. 2018; 9:1995. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30197637/ 27. IARC. Biological Agents. 2009; 100. 28. Habbous S, Chu KP, Lau H, Schorr M, Belayneh M, et al. Human papillomavirus in oropharyngeal cancer in Canada: analysis of 5comprehensive cancer centres using multiple imputation. CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association J. 189: E1030–E1040. PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5555753/ 29. Mégraud F. H pylori antibiotic resistance: prevalence, importance, and advances in testing. Gut. 2004; 53: 1374–1384. PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1774187/ 30. Kohanski MA, Tharakan A, Lane AP, Ramanathan M Jr. Bactericidal antibiotics promote reactive oxygen species formation and infl ammation in human sinonasal epithelial cells. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2016; 6: 191-200. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26624249/ 31. Ben B, MD et al. Antibiotics increased risk of cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2015; 51: 2655–2664. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26338196/ 32. Annamari K, Harri R, Timo K, Eero P, Markku H, et al. Antibiotic predicts an increased risk of cancer. Wiley-Liss, Inc. 2008; 123: 2152-2155.PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18704945/ 33. Tim N. Antibiotics may increase the risk of bowel cancer. Medical News Today. 2017.34. Sigma M. Penicillin/Streptomycin/Amphotericin B Solution (100X), Tissue Culture Grade – Calbiochem-harmful and teratogenic and carcinogenic.35. Velicer Christine M, Heckbert SR, Lampe JW. Antibiotic Use in Relation to the Risk of Breast Cancer. JAMA. 2004; 291: 827-835. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14970061/ 36. Fraser Gary E, Jaceldo-Siegl K, Orlich M, Mashchak A, Sirirat R, et al. Dairy, soy, and risk of breast cancer: those confounded milks. Int J Epidemiol. 2020; dyaa007. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32095830/ 37. IARC. Ampicillin was tested for carcinogenicity by oral administration in mice and rats. It increased the incidences of mononuclear-cell leukemia and of phaeochromocytomas of the adrenal medulla in male rats. A slight increase in the incidence of benign lung tumours was observed in female mice. 1990; 50. 38. Jyrkkanen J. Pesticide Carcinogens in Mothers’ Milk and Total Diet; An Issue of Motherhood; ... Key Words: breast cancer, carcinogens, childhood cancers. 2010.PubMed: https://jorma-jyrkkanen.livejournal.com/142897.html39. Siegel RL, Torre LA, Soerjomataram I, Global patterns and trends in colorectal cancer incidence in young adults. Gut. 2019; 68: 2179-2185. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31488504/ 40. Zhao J, Zhu Y, Wang PP, West R, Buehler S, et al. Interaction between alcohol drinking and obesity in relation to colorectal cancer risk: a case-control study in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. BMC Public Health. 2012; 12: 94. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22296784/ 41. Taniue K, Hayashi T, Kamoshida Y, Kurimoto A, Takeda Y, et al. UHRF1-KAT7-mediated regulation of TUSC3 expression via histone methylation/acetylation is critical for the proliferation of colon cancer cells. Oncogene. 2020; 39: 1018-1030.42. Wang X, Moraes CT. Increases in mitochondrial biogenesis impair carcinogenesis at multiple levels. Molecuar Oncology. 2011; 399-409. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21855427/ 43. Chen T. et al. (My comment) Pesticides induced mitochondrial fragmentation at low levels. Int J Mol Sci. 2017; 18. PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5751110/ 44. Alavanja MCR, Bonner MR. Occupational pesticide exposures and cancer risk. A review. J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 2018; 15: 238–263. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22571220/ 45. Ray WA, Stein M, May D. Common antibiotic found to pose increased heart risk. New Engl J Med. 2012. PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3374857/ 46. Giudicessi John R, Ackerman MJ, Azithromycin and Risk of Sudden Cardiac Death: Guilty as Charged or Falsely Accused? Cleve Clin J Antibiotic induced changes to mitochondria result in potential contributions to carcinogenesis, heart pathologies, other medical conditions and ecosystem riskshttps://www.heighpubs.org/jccm171https://doi.org/10.29328/journal.jccm.1001104Med. 2013; 80: 539–544. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24001961/ 47. University of British Columbia. Commonly used antibiotics may lead to heart problems.” Science Daily. 2019. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/09/190910154710.htm 48. FDA. FDA warns some pesticides can cause fatal heart damage. NBC Health News. 2018.49. Arias PL, Esteller M. Coding and Non-Coding Genes Silenced Epigenetically in Cancer. Open Biol. 2017; 7: PMC5627056.50. Sumei W, et al. Mutual regulation of microRNAs and DNA methylation in human cancers. Epigenetics. 2017; 12: 187-197. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28059592 51. Rivlin N, Brosh R, Oren M, Rotter V. Mutations in the p53 Tumor Suppressor Gene: Important Milestones at the Various Steps of Tumorigenesis. Genes & cancer. 2011; 2: 466–474. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21779514/ 52. Cadernos de Saúde Pública. Brazil Tribal Cancers. Print version ISSN 0102-311XOn-line version ISSN 1678-4464Cad. Saúde Pública. 2019; 35.53. Raturi A, Simmen T. Where the endoplasmic reticulum and themitochondrion tie the knot: The mitochondria-associated membrane (MAM) Biochemica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Molecular Cell Res.2013; 1833: 213-224. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22575682/ 54. Wallace DC. Mitochondria and cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2012; 12: 685–698. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23001348/ 55. Baxter JS, Leavy OC, Dryden NH. et al. Capture Hi-C identifi es putative target genes at 33 breast cancer risk loci. Nat Commun. 2018; 9: 1028. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29531215/ 56. Steinberg P. Red meat derived Nitroso Compounds, Lipid Peroxidation Products and Colorectal Cancer. Foods. 2019. 8: 252. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31336781/ Independent Confirmation https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6721461/?fbclid=IwAR208pYQF6nwxDfEo5JvxCYIpXKyXRCA_p1GsvYgCO2kAiVcDS_IygIIVUA Cancers (Basel). 2019 Aug; 11(8): 1174. Published online 2019 Aug 14. doi: 10.3390/cancers11081174 PMCID: PMC6721461 PMID: 31416208 Use of Antibiotics and Risk of Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies Fausto Petrelli,1,* Michele Ghidini,2 Antonio Ghidini,3 Gianluca Perego,4 Mary Cabiddu,1 Shelize Khakoo,5 Emanuela Oggionni,6 Chiara Abeni,7 Jens Claus Hahne,8 Gianluca Tomasello,9 and Alberto Zaniboni7 Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Go to: Abstract The association between antibiotic use and risk of cancer development is unclear, and clinical trials are lacking. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies to assess the association between antibiotic use and risk of cancer. PubMed, the Cochrane Library and EMBASE were searched from inception to 24 February 2019 for studies reporting antibiotic use and subsequent risk of cancer. We included observational studies of adult subjects with previous exposure to antibiotics and available information on incident cancer diagnoses. For each of the eligible studies, data were collected by three reviewers. Risk of cancer was pooled to provide an adjusted odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The primary outcome was the risk of developing cancer in ever versus non-antibiotic users. Cancer risk’s association with antibiotic intake was evaluated among 7,947,270 participants (n = 25 studies). Overall, antibiotic use was an independent risk factor for cancer occurrence (OR 1.18, 95%CI 1.12–1.24, p < 0.001). The risk was especially increased for lung cancer (OR 1.29, 95%CI 1.03–1.61, p = 0.02), lymphomas (OR 1.31, 95%CI 1.13–1.51, p < 0.001), pancreatic cancer (OR 1.28, 95%CI 1.04–1.57, p = 0.019), renal cell carcinoma (OR 1.28, 95%CI 1.1–1.5, p = 0.001), and multiple myeloma (OR 1.36, 95%CI 1.18–1.56, p < 0.001). There is moderate evidence that excessive or prolonged use of antibiotics during a person’s life is associated with slight increased risk of various cancers. The message is potentially important for public health policies because minimizing improper antibiotic use within a program of antibiotic stewardship could also reduce cancer incidence. Keywords: cancer, antibiotics, meta-analysis, risk factor