Exact number of alcoholic drinks that cause colon cancer exploding in young people revealed
It's one of the most widely accepted habits in modern life - a glass of wine with dinner, a cold beer after work.
But mounting evidence suggests that even these modest indulgences may quietly be increasing your risk of colon cancer, one of the deadliest - and often symptomless - forms of the disease.
Your browser does not support iframes. Your browser does not support iframes.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
42 minutes ago
- The Guardian
RFK Jr will be ‘personally responsible' for children's deaths by halting vaccine alliance funding, experts say
Robert F Kennedy Jr will be 'personally responsible' for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of children after he refused to renew US funding for a global vaccines body, public health experts said. The US health secretary said Wednesday that the United States would halt funding for Gavi, the vaccine alliance that has immunised more than one billion children since 2000, in a statement that has also been criticised for spreading disinformation on vaccine safety. Gavi is a partnership between public bodies and the private sector that works to provide vaccines in many of the world's poorest countries. It has prevented an estimated 18.8 million deaths, and hosts global emergency stockpiles against Ebola, yellow fever, meningitis and cholera. The US has long been one of its major funders, and provided around 13% of its budget. Gavi announced after a pledging event on Wednesday that it had secured more than $9bn in donations for the next five years, and would continue to chase the $11.9bn total it required. But in a video played at the event, Kennedy said the US would no longer contribute to the organisation until it had worked to 're-earn the public trust'. He criticised Gavi's actions during the Covid-19 pandemic, suggested it should not recommend Covid-19 vaccines for pregnant women, and said it had 'neglected the key issue of vaccine safety'. Gavi set out a detailed rebuttal to Kennedy's claims, stressing that its 'utmost concern is the health and safety of children'. Atul Gawande, a former senior official at USAID, wrote online: 'This pull out will cost 100s of thousands of children's lives a year – and RFK Jr will be personally responsible.' Gavi's own estimates, reported by the New York Times, suggest the loss of US support may mean 75 million children miss out on routine vaccinations over the next five years and 1.2 million die as a result. The UK government has also been criticised for lowering its funding for Gavi, although its £1.25bn ($1.7bn) pledge still made it Gavi's top donor country. Other major donors include the Gates Foundation, which committed $1.6bn, and the European Union a combined €2 billion ($2.3bn). In his video, Kennedy particularly criticised 'whole cell' DTP vaccines provided by Gavi, which protect against diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (whooping cough). The US and many richer countries, including the UK, have switched to a newer version that causes fewer short-term reactions but does not remain effective for as long, requiring more boosters. The World Health Organization says both types have 'excellent safety records'. Dr Tom Frieden, president and CEO of Resolve to Save Lives and a former CDC director, said: 'Many countries choose to continue the whole cell vaccine. They may have decided this because their populations have a greater risk of serious illness, they have healthcare systems less able to deal with serious pertussis infections, or may simply have made the opposite decision – more short-term adverse reactions, better protection against pertussis. 'Calling this choice not 'taking vaccine safety seriously' is misinformation, plain and simple.' Seth Berkley, former chief executive of Gavi, said in a post on LinkedIn that Kennedy's claims were 'a mix of misinformation and some disinformation' and 'disingenuous', adding: 'It is irresponsible to provide disinformation from a position of political power.' A major study partly funded by Gavi and published in the Lancet this week found vaccine coverage had stalled or reversed globally, driven by persistent health inequalities and rising levels of misinformation and hesitancy.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
What Ozempic really does to your face: All the tell-tale signs of using skinny jabs, from bigger lips to sunken eyes
The Ozempic boom has seen a drug widely used to treat diabetes and manage obesity in adults transform into 'miracle' weight loss jab that's coveted by anyone with a few extra kilos to shed. Ozempic and other alternatives like Mounjaro and Wegovy are all different brand names for the drug semaglutide that mimics the the actions of GLP-1 - a hormone in the brain that regulates appetite and feelings of fullness. Weekly doses of these blockbuster weight loss medicines can help people shed 15 to 20 per cent of their body weight on average - but it can also pile on the years and make you look older than you are, experts say. The rapid and drastic weight loss triggered by these medicines has left people 'freaking out' about developing so-called 'Ozempic face', celebrity nutritionist Rose Ferguson told Femail. The 49-year-old former model, who is close friends with Kate Moss and boasts 116,000 followers on Instagram, reported a rise in the number of her clients who are worried about their face transfroming from these injections. Semaglutide, which is not a targeted drug, does not just cause loss around the stomach and thighs, but the entire body - including the face. This means that, although it has helped millions around the world achieve their weight loss goals, the 'skinny shot' can also famously make users look extremely gaunt over time - a phenomenon critics have unflatteringly labelled 'Ozempic face'. But how exactly does Ozempic manifest? Dermatologists, aestheticians and cosmetic surgeons break down the tell-tale signs to watch for, as more information about the drug's side effects become known. More visible wrinkles People using skinny jabs like Ozempic might notice a greater number of wrinkles all over their visage - including on the forehead - as these 'miracle' weight loss treatments cause a loss of volume in the face. According to New York-based cosmetic dermatologist Dr Michele Green, 'this volume loss can also worsen the appearance of existing fine lines, wrinkles, and skin laxity' and, therefore, contribute to a more 'aged' look with continued use. Eyes sink Experts also pointed out how Ozempic can make your eyes look more sunken as a result of rapid weight loss - with people reporting anywher Speaking to US-based plastic surgeon pointed out a 'hollowing under the eyes' and 'more wrinkles' and fine lines around them as the weight loss drug begins to show results. Noting how the face of Robbie Williams, who admitted to taking 'something like Ozempic' to shed pounds and manage his 'type-2 self-loathing', she added: 'With Robbie, you can see the direct results of weight loss.' Cheeks sag When you lose weight over an extended period of time, it allows the skin to contract and shrink with the body - but drugs like Ozempic significantly accelerate the process. And while this weight loss reduces facial or subcutaneous fat - as well as making the body leaner - it also leads to loose skin because it hasn't had enough time to retract. This leads to cheeks that sag or droop, and is one of the main characteristics of 'Ozempic face'. 'By depleting the subcutaneous fat, the skin appears thinner, with more wrinkling and often lipstick lines,' New York-based plastic surgeon Dr Barry Weintraub told this website. Lips get bigger While the most common symptoms of this condtion include drooping around the cheeks, sunken eyes, and an increased number of wrinkles, a plumper, more pronounced pout can also occur in people who have injectable fillers. Speaking to MailOnline, aesthetician Kayti Brooks said that 'Ozempic face' makes lip fillers look more pronounced. The expert - who runs Grey Door Aesthetics in Hove - said: 'Losing weight at the phenomenal rate Ozempic allows will lose the fat all over the body including the face - but overfilled lips will not shrink. 'Any filler won't have the support structure of the skin. The filler will stay and the lips stay big or bigger! With the skin laxity disappearing the client may feel the need to plump up with filler. 'This is hugely ageing and so obvious what procedures have been carried out.' Folds at the corner of the mouth Dr Green told that 'Ozempic mouth' is something she is seeing among many of her clients taking the blockbuster weight loss medication. She said: 'Many users of Ozempic who I know report noticeable volume loss in the face, which can result in the formation of fine lines, wrinkles, sagging skin, and jowls around the mouth. The condition is considered part of a broader phenomenon dubbed 'Ozempic face' where rapid weight loss causes sagging in the cheeks and around the mouth. Dr Green noted that the appearance of an aged mouth is especially apparent on people who rapidly lose weight from higher doses of the GLP-1 drug. It is characterised by deep folds at the corners of the mouth, increased vertical wrinkles on the lips, sagging skin around the borders of the lips and and drooping skin around the chin. Dr Green has noticed a number of celebrities suffering from Ozempic mouth as the result of taking weight loss drugs, with some of her standout examples being Sharon Osbourne, Rebel Wilson and Whoopi Goldberg. Tooth decay The latest side effect linked to the use of skinny jabs is tooth decay, with experts noting a rise in the number of patients complaining of 'Ozempic teeth'. The unofficial umbrella term refers to dental problems such as tooth decay and gum disease linked to these weight loss drugs that are now used by millions across the world. 'While there is no direct scientific evidence yet, in clinical settings semaglutide drugs like Ozempic are starting to show correlation with damaged teeth,' Dr Sandip Sachar, a dentist, told The Standard. Experts told the outlet there could be a couple of different reasons for this. First, GLP-1 receptor agonists like Ozempic can lead to less saliva being produced and, consequently, hinder the mouth's self-cleansing abilities. The second reason is linked to acid reflux, a common side-effect of these jabs. An increase in the amount of acid 'can erode your teeth,' Dr Daniel Atkinson, clinical lead at told the paper. Finally, Ozempic's appetite-suppression qualities can make it difficult for the body to get the nutrients it requires to maintain healthy teeth.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Should Australia worry about RFK Jr's shock flu vaccine move?
An influential US vaccine panel has recommended against seasonal influenza vaccines containing a specific preservative, causing concern among medical and scientific experts who fear the decision may impact future vaccine availability. But what is the preservative, why is it the subject of controversy and will it affect vaccines in Australia? Robert F Kennedy Jr, a vaccine sceptic and the United States' health secretary, overhauled the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP). He fired all 17 former members and appointed his ideological allies, some of whom have been associated with the spread of vaccine misinformation. The chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Infectious Diseases, Dr Sean O'Leary, said the world was looking at the new ACIP 'in horror', and that it was 'truly an embarrassment'. On Friday (Australia time) ACIP voted to recommend against influenza vaccines containing thimerosal, known in Australia as thiomersal. Anti-vaxxers have long scaremongered about thiomersal, a vaccine preservative, even though it is safe and makes vaccines safer by preventing bacterial and fungal contamination. There are concerns the move could make vaccines more expensive and harder to get, and broader concerns are that ACIP's decision could fuel misinformation and vaccine hesitancy. Of the ACIP panel, five voted in favour, one abstained and Dr Cody Meissner, a paediatrics professor, was the sole 'no' vote. 'Removing thimerosal from all vaccines used in other countries … is going to reduce access to these vaccines, it will increase costs, and I think it's important to note that no study has ever indicated any harm from thimerosal,' he said. Thiomersal is a safe and effective preservative that is rarely, but sometimes, used in vaccines. It is contains ethylmercury, which is not to be confused with methylmercury, which accumulates in the body and has toxic effects. Ethylmercury, on the other hand, is more quickly converted in the body to inorganic mercury, then excreted. The National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance (NCIRS) says it has been used in very small amounts since the 1930s to prevent bacterial and fungal contamination, particularly in multi-dose vials where contamination is more likely. At about the same time as Andrew Wakefield's thoroughly debunked work that falsely linked vaccines with autism, a study on methylmercury (not ethylmercury, the one in thiomersal) came out. People falsely conflated the two types of mercury and linked it with Wakefield's false claims that vaccines were connected to autism. None of the vaccines listed on the National Immunisation Program use thiomersal. It is only present in the vaccine for Q fever, which is only recommended for people at risk through their contact with animals. Thiomersal has not been used in any of the vaccines routinely given to children in Australia since 2000. Dr Gary Grohmann, the former head of immunobiology evaluating vaccines at the Therapeutic Goods Administration, says Australia has one of the world's best vaccine programs and is 'pretty autonomous' from the US. Grohmann also worked for the World Health Organisation in Geneva as a virologist. He says thiomersal is generally not needed because Australia mostly uses single-dose vaccines that are not at the same risk of contamination as multi-dose vaccines. He says as well, out of an overabundance of caution and a concern with public perception, Australia decided not to use thiomersal even though it is safe. In part, Professor Julie Leask, a social researcher specialising in vaccination at the University of Sydney, says that may have done more harm in the end, by 'legitimising this idea' that it was harmful. Also, while there is no evidence of potential harm, there was a purely theoretical concern about higher intakes in premature babies with low birth weights, as well as a more general wish to reduce children's exposure to mercury. Leask says it will have 'very little impact on vaccine availability' in Australia. But there are other concerns. A speculative one, she says, is that vaccine manufacturers could get spooked by ACIP's move 'throwing shade' on thiomersal and remove funding for vaccine research using it. The far bigger problem she said, is the 'super-spreading of misinformation or distortion of evidence' to make vaccines look harmful, by the sort of expert committee we were meant to be able to trust. 'This anti-vax sentiment is now at this very high level in the US government, and that gives it a form of legitimacy that it's never really had before,' she says. 'We've never seen a western government so willing to undermine public confidence in vaccinations. I have never been so concerned about the propensity for vaccine confidence to be eroded by what's happening in the US right now.' Grohmann agrees. 'The biggest problem is disinformation, which stops people getting their children vaccinated,' he says. 'Then you might get outbreaks of measles, of whooping cough, in unvaccinated communities.' Leask says people should use their critical faculties to judge what they read, particularly online. 'When you seem to be bombarded with scary information about vaccines, often that is highly cherrypicked,' she says. 'Keep an eye on advice from Australia. 'You can still trust what you can read from authoritative sources in Australia, including NCIRS and the government.' Grohmann says as well as dismissing disinformation and fearmongering about rare side effects, people should understand the benefits of vaccines for saving lives and for the economy. Each dollar spent on vaccination saves $16, he says. 'There's a positive economic benefit in terms of hospitalisations, GP visits, parents not missing work, kids not missing school,' he says. His other advice is to 'listen to experts, not YouTubers'. 'We vaccinate for a reason,' he says. 'It's to stop people from dying.' And, Leask says, there will be interesting tussles in the US between those who know the evidence and those who would distort it. 'There are still heroes within US agencies who are fighting a quiet, internal battle to keep good evidence in the spotlight,' she says.
