A team of scientists has extended the lives of old mice by connecting their blood vessels to young mice. The infusions of youthful blood led the older animals to live 6 to 9 percent longer, the study found, roughly equivalent to six extra years for an average human. From a report: While the study does not point to an anti-aging treatment for people, it does hint that the blood of young mice contains compounds that promote longevity, the researchers said. "I would guess it's a useful cocktail," said James White, a cell biologist at the Duke University School of Medicine and an author of the new study.

Joining animals together, known as parabiosis, has a long history in science. In the 19th century, French scientists connected the blood vessels of two rats. To prove that the rats shared a circulatory system, they injected belladonna, a compound from the deadly nightshade plant, into one of the animals. The pupils of both rats dilated. In the 1950s, Clive McCay of Cornell University and his colleagues used parabiosis to explore aging. They joined young and old rats, stitching together their flanks so that the capillaries in their skin merged. Later, Dr. McCay and his colleagues examined the cartilage in the old rats and concluded it looked younger. In the early 2000s, parabiosis went through a renaissance. Researchers used 21st century techniques to study what happened when animals of different ages shared the same bloodstream. They found the muscles and brains of old mice were rejuvenated, while younger mice showed signs of accelerated aging.

A study that followed thousands of people over 25 years has identified proteins linked to the development of dementia if their levels are unbalanced during middle age. From a report: The findings, published in Science Translational Medicine on 19 July, could contribute to the development of new diagnostic tests, or even treatments, for dementia-causing diseases. Most of the proteins have functions unrelated to the brain. "We're seeing so much involvement of the peripheral biology decades before the typical onset of dementia," says study author Keenan Walker, a neuroscientist at the US National Institute on Aging in Bethesda, Maryland. Equipped with blood samples from more than 10,000 participants, Walker and his colleagues questioned whether they could find predictors of dementia years before its onset by looking at a person's proteome -- the collection of all the proteins expressed throughout the body. They searched for any signs of dysregulation -- when proteins are at levels much higher or lower than normal.

The samples were collected as part of an ongoing study that began in 1987. Participants returned for examination six times over three decades, and during this time, around 1 in 5 of them developed dementia. The researchers found 32 proteins that, if dysregulated in people aged 45 to 60, were strongly associated with an elevated chance of developing dementia in later life. It is unclear how exactly these proteins might be involved in the disease, but the link is "highly unlikely to be due to just chance alone," says Walker.

An Ohio plastic surgeon lost her medical license after the state medical board investigated her for livestreaming operations on TikTok and surgical complications reported by patients. From a report: The State Medical Board of Ohio voted at a hearing on Wednesday to permanently revoke Dr. Katharine Roxanne Grawe's medical license and to fine her $4,500 "based on her failure to meet standard of care." At the hearing, doctors on the board said that Dr. Grawe, known online as "Dr. Roxy," had previously been cautioned about protecting patient privacy on social media. They also spoke about her treatment of three unnamed patients who had reported complications from procedures, including one whose surgery Dr. Grawe had broadcast a part of on social media.

Dr. Jonathan B. Feibel, vice president of the medical board, recommended that Dr. Grawe's license be revoked because of the "life altering, reckless treatment" provided to those patients. "These outcomes were not normal complications like those that exist in the routine practice of medicine, but were rather caused by recklessness and disregard for the rules governing the practice of medicine in Ohio," he said.

Cancer cells-to-be accumulate a series of specific genetic changes in a predictable and sequential way years before they are identifiable as pre-malignancies, researchers at Stanford Medicine have found. Stanford Medicine blog: Many of these changes affect pathways that control cell division, structure and internal messaging -- leaving the cells poised to go bad long before any visible signs or symptoms occur. The study is the first to exhaustively observe the natural evolution of the earliest stages of human cancers, starting with cells that have a single cancer-priming mutation and culminating with a panel of descendants harboring a galaxy of genetic abnormalities.

Identifying the first steps associated with future cancer development could not only facilitate earlier-than-ever diagnosis -- when a deadly outcome is but a twinkle in a rogue cell's eye -- but may also highlight novel interventions that could stop the disease in its tracks, the researchers say. "Ideally, we would find ways to intercept this progression before the cells become truly cancerous," said Christina Curtis, PhD, professor of medicine, of genetics and of biomedical data science. "Can we identify a minimal constellation of genetic alterations that imply the cell will progress? And, if so, can we intervene? The striking reproducibility in the genetic changes we observed from multiple donors suggests it's possible."

Nine days ago the U.S. government released a report on the advantages of studying "scientific and societal implications" of "solar radiation modification" (or SRM) to explore its possible "risks and benefits...as a component of climate policy."

The report's executive summary seems to concede the technique would "negate (explicitly offset) all current or future impacts of climate change" — but would also introduce "an additional change" to "the existing, complex climate system, with ramifications which are not now well understood." Or, as Politico puts it, "The White House cautiously endorsed the idea of studying how to block sunlight from hitting Earth's surface as a way to limit global warming in a congressionally mandated report that could help bring efforts once confined to science fiction into the realm of legitimate debate."

But again, the report endorsed the idea of studying it — to further understand the risks, and also help prepare for "possible deployment of SRM by other public or private actors." Politico emphasized how this report "added a degree of skepticism by noting that Congress has ordered the review, and the administration said it does not signal any new policy decisions related to a process that is sometimes referred to — or derided as — geoengineering." "Climate change is already having profound effects on the physical and natural world, and on human well-being, and these effects will only grow as greenhouse gas concentrations increase and warming continues," the report said. "Understanding these impacts is crucial to enable informed decisions around a possible role for SRM in addressing human hardships associated with climate change..."

The White House said that any potential research on solar radiation modification should be undertaken with "appropriate international cooperation."
It's not just the U.S. making official statements. Their report was released "the same week that European Union leaders opened the door to international discussions of solar radiation modification," according to Politico's report: Policymakers in the European Union have signaled a willingness to begin international discussions of whether and how humanity could limit heating from the sun. "Guided by the precautionary principle, the EU will support international efforts to assess comprehensively the risks and uncertainties of climate interventions, including solar radiation modification and promote discussions on a potential international framework for its governance, including research related aspects," the European Parliament and European Council said in a joint communication.
And it also "follows an open letter by more than 60 leading scientists calling for more research," reports Scientific American. They also note a new supercomputer helping climate scientists model the effects of injecting human-made, sun-blocking aerosols into the stratosphere: The machine, named Derecho, began operating this month at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and will allow scientists to run more detailed weather models for research on solar geoengineering, said Kristen Rasmussen, a climate scientist at Colorado State University who is studying how human-made aerosols, which can be used to deflect sunlight, could affect rainfall patterns... "To understand specific impacts on thunderstorms, we require the use of very high-resolution models that can be run for many, many years," Rasmussen said in an interview. "This faster supercomputer will enable more simulations at longer time frames and at higher resolution than we can currently support..."

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine released a report in 2021 urging scientists to study the impacts of geoengineering, which Rasmussen described as a last resort to address climate change.

"We need to be very cautious," she said. "I am not advocating in any way to move forward on any of these types of mitigation efforts. The best thing to do is to stop fossil fuel emissions as much as we can."

"The first drug fully generated by artificial intelligence entered clinical trials with human patients this week," reports CNBC: Insilico Medicine, a Hong Kong-based biotech startup with more than $400 million in funding, created the drug, INS018_055, as a treatment for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, a chronic disease that causes scarring in the lungs. The condition, which has increased in prevalence in recent decades, currently affects about 100,000 people in the U.S. and can lead to death within two to five years if untreated, according to the National Institutes of Health.

"It is the first fully generative AI drug to reach human clinical trials, and specifically Phase II trials with patients," Alex Zhavoronkov, founder and CEO of Insilico Medicine, told CNBC. "While there are other AI-designed drugs in trials, ours is the first drug with both a novel AI-discovered target and a novel AI-generated design...."

"When this company was launched, we were focused on algorithms — developing the technology that could discover and design new molecules," Zhavoronkov said. "I never imagined in those early days that I would be taking my own AI drugs into clinical trials with patients. But we realized that in order to validate our AI platform, we needed to not only design a new drug for a new target, but bring it into clinical trials to prove that our technology worked."
"The company has two other drugs partially generated by AI in the clinical stage..."

Four volunteers will spend the next 378 days in a simulation of Mars, facing harsh, realistic challenges in tight quarters under NASA's watchful eye in preparation for a real-life mission to the red planet. From a report: Research scientist Kelly Haston, structural engineer Ross Brockwell, emergency medicine physician Nathan Jones and US Navy microbiologist Anca Selariu were locked into the virtual planet at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, on Sunday as part of the first of a three-year-long simulation study by the space agency. "The knowledge we gain here will help enable us to send humans to Mars and bring them home safely," Grace Douglas, the mission's principal investigator at NASA, said during a briefing.

Nasa 3D-printed the 1,700-square-foot facility, dubbed Crew Health and Performance Exploration Analog -- or CHAPEA. It will be the longest analog mission in the agency's history. The habitat -- named Mars Dune Alpha -- will feature a kitchen, private crew quarters, and two bathrooms, with medical, work, and recreation areas. The crew will be expected to carry out "mission activities," like collecting geological samples, exercising, and practicing personal hygiene and health care, with minimal contact with their family and loved ones, according to NASA. To capture the true essence of life on our neighboring planet, the crew must work through "environmental stressors," including limits on resources, periods of isolation, and equipment failures.

American retailers see opportunities in the primary-care business. From a report: With his long white coat, stethoscope, genially soothing manner and wonky eagerness to discuss "population health management" and "patient-centred" medicine, Ronald Searcy seems the Platonic ideal of a primary-care doctor. The most unusual thing about him is where he works: a compact facility complete with examination rooms, dentist's office, phlebotomy lab and X-ray room tucked into a Walmart in north-west Arkansas. Since 2019, Walmart has opened 32 of these "health centres" in five states; by the end of next year it plans to more than double that number, and expand into two more states. Walmart is not the only big company expanding its medical offerings.

[...] What do these companies see in the medical business? The answer, befitting America's Byzantine and rent-filled health-care system, is both simple and complex. The simple answer is money. Americans spend a stunning amount of it on health: roughly 18% of GDP in 2021, far exceeding the rich-country average of about 10% and more than double the ratio of some, such as South Korea, with healthier and longer-lived populations. Americans' spending is forecast to rise by 5.4% per year over the next eight years, outpacing economic growth and accounting for almost 20% of GDP by 2031. The bulk of that spending will come from Medicaid and Medicare, federal programmes that cover health-care costs for, respectively, poor people and over-65s. The complex part reflects changes in how insurers, including Medicaid and Medicare, pay for coverage; as well as changes in how consumers are willing to get it.

"I predict that Generative Artificial Intelligence is going to go a long way toward keeping Moore's Law in force," writes long-time tech pundit Robert X. Cringely, "and the way this is going to happen says a lot about the chip business, global economics, and Artificial Intelligence, itself." The current el cheapo AI research frenzy is likely to subside as LLaMA ages into obsolescence and has to be replaced by something more expensive, putting Google, Microsoft and OpenAI back in control. Understand, too, that these big, established companies like the idea of LLMs costing so much to build because that makes it harder for startups to disrupt. It's a form of restraint of trade, though not illegal...

[T]here is an opportunity for vertical LLMs trained on different data — real data from industries like medicine and auto mechanics. Whoever owns this data will own these markets. What will make these models both better and cheaper is they can be built from a LLaMA base because most of that data doesn't have to change over time... Bloomberg has already done this for investment advice using its unique database of historical financial information. With an average of 50 billion nodes, these vertical models will cost only five percent as much to run as OpenAI's one billion node GPT-4...

[I]t ought to be pretty simple to apply AI to chip design, building custom chip design models to iterate into existing simulators and refine new designs that actually have a pretty good chance of being novel.

And who will be the first to leverage this chip AI? China... Look for fabless AI chip startups to spring-up around Chinese universities and for the Chinese Communist Party to put lots of money into this very cost-effective work. Because even if it's used just to slim-down and improve existing designs, that's another generation of chips China might otherwise not have had at all.

"California startup Varda Space Industries launched its first test mission on June 12," reports CNN, "successfully sending a 200-pound (90-kilogram) capsule designed to carry drug research into Earth's orbit.

"The experiment, conducted in microgravity by simple onboard machines, aims to test whether it would be possible to manufacture pharmaceuticals in space remotely." Research has already established that protein crystals grown in a weightless environment can result in more perfect structures compared with those grown on Earth. These space-formed crystals could potentially then be used to create better-performing drugs that the human body can more easily absorb.
"Its research, company officials hope, could lead to better, more effective drugs — and hefty profits," CNN reported earlier this week: "It's not as sexy a human-interest story as tourism when it comes to commercialization of the cosmos," said Will Bruey, Varda's CEO and cofounder. "But the bet that we're making at Varda is that manufacturing is actually the next big industry that gets commercialized." Varda launched its first test mission Monday aboard a SpaceX rocket, which took off from Vandenberg Space Force Base in California just after 2:30 pm PT. The company then confirmed in a tweet that its satellite successfully separated from the rocket...

If successful, Varda hopes to scale its business rapidly, sending regular flights of satellites into orbit stuffed with experiments on behalf of pharmaceutical companies. Eventually, the firm hopes that research will yield a golden ticket drug, one that proves to be better when manufactured in space and can return royalties to Varda for years to come... Founded less than three years ago, Varda has gone from an idea to a company with more than $100 million in seed funding and grants, a 68,000-square-foot factory, and a satellite in space. Its workforce has grown to nearly 100 employees...

One day, the company hopes Varda flights will be so common that its capsules will blaze across the night sky every evening, like shooting stars to those on the ground who catch a glimpse. From there, Varda could even look to develop a research platform on a private space station, where pharma researchers could travel themselves.

Scientists are calling for a major clinical trial to investigate the potential benefits of taurine supplementation, a substance commonly found in energy drinks. Animal studies have shown that replenishing taurine levels to more youthful levels can slow down the aging process, improve health, and even extend lifespans in mice. The Guardian reports: Prof Henning Wackerhage, a molecular exercise physiologist on the team at the Technical University of Munich, said a trial would compare how humans fared after taking daily taurine or placebo supplements. "It will probably be very difficult to look at whether they live longer, but at least we can check if they live healthier for longer, and that of course is the goal for medicine."

Yadav's team homed in on taurine as a potential driver of the ageing process in 2012 when an analysis of blood compounds found that levels of the amino acid dropped dramatically with age in mice, monkeys and humans. By the age of 60, taurine levels in a typical person slumped to one-third of that seen in five-year-olds, they found. The discovery prompted the team to test the impact of extra taurine on middle-aged mice. "Whatever we checked, taurine-supplemented mice were healthier and appeared younger than the control mice," Yadav said, noting they had denser bones, stronger muscles, better memory and younger looking immune systems. "Taurine made animals live healthier and longer lives by affecting all the major hallmarks of ageing." Beyond improving health, mice on taurine lived longer -- on average an extra 10% for males and 12% for females, amounting to an additional three to four months, the equivalent of seven or eight human years. A comparable dose for humans would be three to six grams a day.

The scientists next looked at whether boosting taurine benefited animals that were much closer biologically to humans. A six-month trial in middle-aged macaques found that a daily taurine pill appeared to boost health by preventing weight gain, lowering blood glucose and improving bone density and the immune system. Other evidence suggests taurine supplementation may have some effect in humans. Yadav and his team analysed medical data from 12,000 Europeans aged 60 and over. Those with higher taurine levels had less obesity, type 2 diabetes and high blood pressure, and lower levels of inflammation. Strenuous sessions on an exercise bike were found to boost taurine levels, the researchers report in Science.

Without a major trial to demonstrate the safety or any benefits of taurine supplements, the scientists are not recommending people boost their intake through pills, energy drinks or dietary changes. Taurine is made naturally in the body and is found in meat and shellfish diets, but the healthiest diets are largely plant-based. Some energy drinks contain taurine, but the scientists warn they also contain other substances that may not be safe to consume at high levels.

Scientists have used artificial intelligence (AI) to discover a new antibiotic that can kill a deadly species of superbug. From a report: The AI helped narrow down thousands of potential chemicals to a handful that could be tested in the laboratory. The result was a potent, experimental antibiotic called abaucin, which will need further tests before being used. The researchers in Canada and the US say AI has the power to massively accelerate the discovery of new drugs. It is the latest example of how the tools of artificial intelligence can be a revolutionary force in science and medicine.

Antibiotics kill bacteria. However, there has been a lack of new drugs for decades and bacteria are becoming harder to treat, as they evolve resistance to the ones we have. More than a million people a year are estimated to die from infections that resist treatment with antibiotics. The researchers focused on one of the most problematic species of bacteria - Acinetobacter baumannii, which can infect wounds and cause pneumonia. You may not have heard of it, but it is one of the three superbugs the World Health Organization has identified as a "critical" threat.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from STAT News: Amid what he called the worst youth mental health crisis in recent memory, U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy issued an advisory Tuesday warning about social media's impact on developing young brains. "Through the last two and a half years I've been in office, I've been hearing concerns from kids and parents," Murthy told STAT. "Parents are asking 'Is social media safe for my kids?' Based on our review of the data, there isn't enough evidence that it is safe for our kids."

The advisory calls on policymakers and technology companies to take steps to minimize the risks of social media. "This is not going to be an issue that we solve with one sector alone," Murthy said. Policymakers, according to the report, need to develop age restrictions and safety standards for social media -- much like the regulations that the U.S. has in place for everything from cars to medicine. Specifically, Murthy would like to see policymakers require a higher standard of data privacy for children to protect them from potential harms like exploitation and abuse. Technology companies, meanwhile, need to be more transparent about the data they share, according to Murthy. He calls on companies to assess the potential risks of online interactions and take active steps to prevent potential misuse. He also suggests the establishment of scientific advisory committees to inform approaches and policies aimed at creating safe online environments for children.

The advisory also suggests families attempt to protect young people's mental health by developing a family media plan aimed at establishing healthy technology boundaries at home, such as creating "tech-free zones" that restrict phone use during certain hours or family mealtime. But Murthy noted that parents are already at the end of their rope in trying to manage how their children are exposed to and using this rapidly evolving technology. That responsibility has fallen entirely on them up to this point. "We've got to move quickly," he said. "None of us should be satisfied until we have clear evidence that these platforms are safe." The surgeon general's report comes two weeks after the American Psychological Association issued a health advisory on teens and social media use. The group noted the increased risk of anxiety and depression among adolescents who are exposed to discrimination and bullying online. "Other research has shown that adolescents ages 12-15 who spent more than three hours per day on social media face a heightened risk of experiencing poor mental health outcomes compared to those who spent less time online," adds STAT News.

Longtime Slashdot reader Okian Warrior writes: There's been a lot of discussion about regulating AI in the news recently, including Sam Altman going before a Senate committee begging for regulation. So far I've seen only calls for regulation, but not suggestions on what those regulations should be. Since Slashdot is largely populated with experts in various fields (software, medicine, law, etc.), maybe we should begin this discussion. And note that if we don't create the reasonable rules, Congress (mostly 80-year old white men with conflicts of interest) will do it for us.

What are some good AI regulation suggestions?

I'll start: A human (and specifically, not an AI system) must be responsible for any medical treatment or diagnosis. If an AI suggests a diagnosis or medical treatment, there must be buy-in from a human who believes the decision is correct, and who would be held responsible in the same manner as a doctor not using AI. The AI must be a tool used by, and not a substitute for, human decisions. This would avoid problems with humans ignoring their responsibility, relying on the software, and causing harm through negligence. Doctors can use AI to (for example) diagnose cancer, but it will be the doctor's diagnosis and not the AI's.

What other suggestions do people have?

A Phase 1 trail of a universal mRNA-based influenza vaccine is under way at Duke Unversity in Durham, North Carolina. It's being developed by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases' (NAID) Vaccine Research Center (VRC). New Atlas reports: Some 50 participants aged 18-49 will be split into three groups and given 10, 25 and 50 micrograms of the active drug, respectively. When optimal dosage is then determined, another 10 participants will get this measured jab. There will also be an additional group who will receive a current quadrivalent seasonal flu shot, so researchers have a comparative dataset that takes into account the immune response and safety of readily available influenza vaccines. Those in the trial will then be regularly evaluated over 12 months to see how the drug's immune response has fared and to assess its short-term and long-term safety.

This trial comes after the initial NIAID's Vaccine Research Center study on the safety and immune response of the H1ssF (H1 hemagglutinin stabilized stem ferritin) nanoparticle vaccine. The Phase 1 trial, from April 2019 to March 2020, delivered broad antibody responses in the 52 participants aged 18-70. The results of the trial were published last month in the journal Science Translational Medicine.

The H1ssF vaccine targets the flu protein hemagglutinin. One section of this protein -- the 'head' -- changes as the virus evolves into different strains, but the stem of the protein is much slower to be altered and remains fairly constant throughout influenza mutations. The researchers believe herein lies the key to a long-lasting, effective universal preventative vaccine. The new trial combines the H1ssF nanoparticle vaccine with messenger RNA (mRNA) as the platform, with the end goal that it'll deliver a more efficient, targeted immune response.

Marines and sailors who were exposed to toxic water at Camp Lejeune, N.C., are much more likely to suffer from Parkinson's disease than their counterparts who were stationed elsewhere, according to a study published Monday. From a report: Troops stationed at Camp Lejeune for even just a few months during the years 1975-85 are 70% more likely to suffer from Parkinson's disease than troops who were at Camp Pendleton, Calif., according to findings from researchers who accounted for other factors in making their determination. Their report was published by the Journal of the American Medical Association. The Department of Veterans Affairs-funded study was led by Dr. Samuel Goldman, a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco Medical School and a staff physician at the San Francisco VA Medical Center.

The Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs have acknowledged for years that troops based at Camp Lejeune and other North Carolina facilities from the early 1950s until the mid-1980s were exposed to a number of harmful chemicals in the drinking water, including the solvents benzene and trichloroethylene, which are linked to Parkinson's. Water processed for the base was contaminated by improper chemical-disposal procedures from an off-base dry cleaner, leaky underground storage tanks, industrial spills and other problems for decades, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. A million veterans and family members have been potentially affected, according to the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

Researchers have discovered that a man with a gene mutation that causes early-onset Alzheimer's disease was protected from developing the disease until the age of 67 due to another mutation in a different gene that blocked the disease from affecting his entorhinal cortex, a brain region associated with memory and cognition. This finding could pave the way for new treatments that delay the onset of Alzheimer's and transform the approach to therapeutics for the disease. The New York Times reports: "This really holds the secret to the next generation of therapeutics," said Dr. Joseph F. Arboleda-Velasquez, a cell biologist at Massachusetts Eye and Ear in Boston and a member of the research team. Dr. Arboleda-Velasquez is a co-founder of a biotechnology company looking to produce drugs that could act on this research. A drug that delays the disease by two decades is not out of the question, said Dr. Diego Sepulveda-Falla, a neuropathologist at the University of Hamburg in Germany and a member of the research team. The mutation results in a potent version of a protein, Reelin, in the entorhinal cortex. That super-potent Reelin ultimately prevents tangled strands of tau proteins from sticking together and forming the structures that are a characteristic of Alzheimer's. The idea is to "go in with a syringe and treat only one area" of the brain, he said.

The man with what the researchers are calling "resilience" to Alzheimer's was part of a decades-long study of 6,000 people living in Colombia who have a gene mutation that causes Alzheimer's in middle age. Many have agreed to genetic testing, brain scans and, after they die, brain autopsies. A few years ago, the same research group in the current study identified a woman who also was protected from Alzheimer's. But in her case, resilience was caused by a mutation in a different gene, APOE. Instead of lacking clumps of tau in one small region of her brain, they were missing in her entire brain. But, the researchers say, they think the two patients are revealing a new pathway to treat Alzheimer's. The two genes that are mutated interrupt a molecular cascade of events needed for tau to aggregate in the brain. The findings were published in the journal Nature Medicine.

From a Science magazine report, shared by schwit1: When neuropsychologist Bernhard Sabel put his new fake-paper detector to work, he was "shocked" by what it found. After screening some 5000 papers, he estimates up to 34% of neuroscience papers published in 2020 were likely made up or plagiarized; in medicine, the figure was 24%. Both numbers, which he and colleagues report in a medRxiv preprint posted on 8 May, are well above levels they calculated for 2010 -- and far larger than the 2% baseline estimated in a 2022 publishers' group report. "It is just too hard to believe" at first, says Sabel of Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg and editor-in-chief of Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience. It's as if "somebody tells you 30% of what you eat is toxic." His findings underscore what was widely suspected: Journals are awash in a rising tide of scientific manuscripts from paper mills -- secretive businesses that allow researchers to pad their publication records by paying for fake papers or undeserved authorship.

"Paper mills have made a fortune by basically attacking a system that has had no idea how to cope with this stuff," says Dorothy Bishop, a University of Oxford psychologist who studies fraudulent publishing practices. A 2 May announcement from the publisher Hindawi underlined the threat: It shut down four of its journals it found were "heavily compromised" by articles from paper mills. Sabel's tool relies on just two indicators -- authors who use private, noninstitutional email addresses, and those who list an affiliation with a hospital. It isn't a perfect solution, because of a high false-positive rate. Other developers of fake-paper detectors, who often reveal little about how their tools work, contend with similar issues. Still, the detectors raise hopes for gaining the advantage over paper mills, which churn out bogus manuscripts containing text, data, and images partly or wholly plagiarized or fabricated, often massaged by ghost writers.

Some papers are endorsed by unrigorous reviewers solicited by the authors. Such manuscripts threaten to corrupt the scientific literature, misleading readers and potentially distorting systematic reviews. The recent advent of artificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT has amplified the concern. To fight back, the International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers (STM), representing 120 publishers, is leading an effort called the Integrity Hub to develop new tools. STM is not revealing much about the detection methods, to avoid tipping off paper mills. "There is a bit of an arms race," says Joris van Rossum, the Integrity Hub's product director. He did say one reliable sign of a fake is referencing many retracted papers; another involves manuscripts and reviews emailed from internet addresses crafted to look like those of legitimate institutions. Twenty publishers -- including the largest, such as Elsevier, Springer Nature, and Wiley -- are helping develop the Integrity Hub tools, and 10 of the publishers are expected to use a paper mill detector the group unveiled in April.

A personalized cancer vaccine made by BioNTech, the German company that produced the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, has shown promising results against pancreatic cancer. The vaccine, which teaches patients' immune systems to attack their tumors, provoked an immune response in half of the 16 patients treated, and those patients did not experience relapses of their cancer during the study. The New York Times reports: Researchers at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, led by Dr. Vinod Balachandran, extracted patients' tumors and shipped samples of them to Germany. There, scientists at BioNTech, the company that made a highly successful COVID vaccine with Pfizer, analyzed the genetic makeup of certain proteins on the surface of the cancer cells. Using that genetic data, BioNTech scientists then produced personalized vaccines designed to teach each patient's immune system to attack the tumors. Like BioNTech's COVID shots, the cancer vaccines relied on messenger RNA. In this case, the vaccines instructed patients' cells to make some of the same proteins found on their excised tumors, potentially provoking an immune response that would come in handy against actual cancer cells.

The study was small: Only 16 patients, all of them white, were given the vaccine, part of a treatment regimen that also included chemotherapy and a drug intended to keep tumors from evading people's immune responses. And the study could not entirely rule out factors other than the vaccine having contributed to better outcomes in some patients. [...] But the simple fact that scientists could create, quality-check and deliver personalized cancer vaccines so quickly -- patients began receiving the vaccines intravenously roughly nine weeks after having their tumors removed -- was a promising sign, experts said.

In patients who did not appear to respond to the vaccine, the cancer tended to return around 13 months after surgery. Patients who did respond, though, showed no signs of relapse during the roughly 18 months they were tracked. Intriguingly, one patient showed evidence of a vaccine-activated immune response in the liver after an unusual growth developed there. The growth later disappeared in imaging tests. "It's anecdotal, but it's nice confirmatory data that the vaccine can get into these other tumor regions," said Dr. Nina Bhardwaj, who studies cancer vaccines at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. "This is the first demonstrable success -- and I will call it a success, despite the preliminary nature of the study -- of an mRNA vaccine in pancreatic cancer," said Dr. Anirban Maitra, a specialist in the disease at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, who was not involved in the study. "By that standard, it's a milestone."

The study has been published in the journal Nature.

The World Health Organization ended the global emergency status for COVID-19 on Friday more than three years after its original declaration, and said countries should now manage the virus that killed more than 6.9 million people along with other infectious diseases. From a report: The global health agency's Emergency Committee met on Thursday and recommended the UN organization declare an end to the coronavirus crisis as a "public health emergency of international concern" -- its highest level of alert -- which has been in place since Jan. 30, 2020. "It is therefore with great hope that I declare COVID-19 over as a global health emergency," said WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, adding that the end of the emergency did not mean COVID was over as a global health threat. During a lengthy conference call to brief the press on the decision, some WHO members became emotional as they urged countries to reflect on lessons learned during the pandemic.