logo
Man's brain turned to glass by hot Vesuvius ash cloud

Man's brain turned to glass by hot Vesuvius ash cloud

Yahoo27-02-2025

Nearly 2,000 years after a young man died in the Vesuvius volcanic eruption, scientists have discovered that his brain was preserved when it turned to glass in an extremely hot cloud of ash.
Researchers found the glass in 2020 and speculated that it was a fossilised brain but did not know how it had formed.
The pea-sized chunks of black glass were found inside the skull of the victim, aged about 20, who died when the volcano erupted in 79 AD near modern-day Naples.
Scientists now believe a cloud of ash as hot as 510C enveloped the brain then very quickly cooled down, transforming the organ into glass.
It is the only known case of human tissue - or any organic material - turning to glass naturally.
"We believe that the very specific conditions that we have reconstructed for the vitrification [the process of something turning into glass] of the brain make it very difficult for there to be other similar remains, although it is not impossible," Prof Guido Giordano from Università Roma Tre told BBC News.
"This is a unique finding," he said.
The brain belonged to a man killed in his bed inside a building called the Collegium on the main street of the Roman city Herculaneum.
The fragments of glass found by the scientists range from 1-2 cm to just few millimetres in size.
The massive eruption of Vesuvius engulfed Herculaneum and nearby Pompeii where up to 20,000 people lived. The remains of about 1,500 people have been found.
Scientists now think the hot ash cloud descended from Vesuvius first, probably causing most of the deaths.
A fast-moving current of hot gas and volcanic matter, also called a pyroclastic flow, followed, burying the area.
Experts believe the ash cloud turned the man's brain into glass because the pyroclastic flow would not have reached high enough temperatures or cooled quickly enough.
The process of glass formation requires very specific temperature conditions and rarely occurs naturally.
For a substance to turn to glass, there must be a huge temperature difference between the substance and its surrounding.
Its liquid form has to cool fast enough not to crystallise when it becomes solid, and it must be at a much higher temperature than its surroundings.
The team used imaging with x-rays and electron microscopy to conclude that the brain must have been heated to at least 510C before cooling rapidly.
No other parts of the man's body are believed to have turned to glass.
Only material containing some liquid can turn to glass, meaning that the bones could not have vitrified.
Other soft tissues, like organs, were likely destroyed by the heat before they could cool down enough to turn to glass.
The scientists believe the skull gave some protection to the brain.
The research is published in the scientific journal - a publication where researchers report their work to other experts - Scientific Reports.
'Once-in-a-century' discovery reveals spectacular luxury of Pompeii
First glimpse inside burnt scroll after 2,000 years

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Making Sense of Melanoma Care Without OS Data
Making Sense of Melanoma Care Without OS Data

Medscape

time43 minutes ago

  • Medscape

Making Sense of Melanoma Care Without OS Data

This transcript has been edited for clarity. Welcome back, everybody. My name is Teresa Amaral, and it's a pleasure as always to have you here for this melanoma series on Medscape. We will finalize this series on where we should go, and what's next in terms of immunotherapy in the adjuvant setting, by looking into the two other aspects that we need to consider when we discuss the factthat there is no overall survival benefit nor are there data on the overall survival benefit for patients treated with immunotherapy in the adjuvant setting. We discussed the first one, which was the fact that there might be some discussions or some uncertainties in terms of the reimbursement because these data are not available yet and might only be available in 2028. We also discussed the number of patients that are needed to treat to prevent a recurrence, especially when we are talking about stage II disease. As well as the fact that this might lead to some uncertainty, both from the treating physicians and the patients, when they need to decide whether they will receive adjuvant therapy or when they will offer adjuvant therapy to their patients. The final point that I would like to bring to the discussion is that this uncertainty might lead to a potential shift to using targeted therapy instead of immunotherapy in patients that have a BRAF V600 mutation. Why is this the case? We have data provided by the COMBI-AD study that investigated targeted therapy, in this case, dabrafenib and trametinib, in patients with BRAF V600–mutated melanoma. We saw that, similar to what we see in immunotherapy, there is a benefit in terms of relapse-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival. We also saw that there was no overall survival benefit for the whole population, but there was a higher benefit when we look numerically at 3, 5, and 7 years, especially for patients with BRAF V600E mutations. It came as a surprise, I would say, that patients with BRAF V600K not only didn't benefit from targeted therapy in the long run in terms of overall survival, despite having a benefit in terms of relapse-free survival, but when the overall survival analysis was conducted, we actually saw a detrimental effectfor patients with BRAF V600K when we compared the treatment with placebo. For these patients, we should not provide adjuvant therapy with targeted therapy. When we compare targeted therapy with immunotherapy in a real-world setting — and this will be the topic for our next series — we see that patients who had received target therapy might have a larger benefit when we look into relapse-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival compared with patients who received I'm only talking about patients who have a BRAF V600 mutation. Finally, some patients may prefer targeted therapies and oral therapy compared with immunotherapy that is given intravenously in the hospital. We see three points that might be associated with the absence of data on overall survival benefit for immunotherapy: the fact that there might be some reimbursement discussions that are associated with this aspect; the fact that in some cases, despite this therapy being recommended in the guidelines, there might be some uncertainty from the doctors and the patients onreceiving and on proposing this therapy; and a potential shift in the use of targeted therapy in favor of immunotherapy for patients with BRAF -mutated melanoma. If we don't have an overall survival benefit, why are we recommending this therapy? What is the benefit of having a relapse-free survival and a distant metastasis-free survival benefit? I would argue that for the patients, this is quite an important event. We have shown that diagnosis of recurrence is the aspect that most impacts the quality of life. When the patients are diagnosed with a recurrence, the quality of life decreases significantly. These data were, for example, mentioned during the COMBI-AD quality of life analysis. Obviously, the fact that the patients live longer without disease might provide them access to new therapies currently being investigated that were not available at the time they were treated with the adjuvant therapy, but might be available for them if they live longer without recurrence. In real-world data, we also see that approximately 50% of patients who are diagnosed with stage IIIB melanoma will be diagnosed with metastatic disease. Although in some cases we might be able to provide surgical resection, neoadjuvant therapy, or other local therapies, such as radiotherapy, for example, the fact is that some patients will have unresectable disease or will be diagnosed with metastatic and inoperable stage IV melanoma, which is quite important and in some cases is associated with a worse outcome.A longer time without evidence of recurrence is important and might lead to a better outcome in the long run. In conclusion, from our discussion so far, we can say that trial data are eagerly awaited, and mature trial data are necessary. In the meantime, we might be able to use real-world data to compensate for that and to analyze and maybe inform the way that we use programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) in the real-world setting in our daily practice. When we look into the absence of overall survival benefit, we also need to consider access in terms of therapies post-recurrence. When the patients recur, they might have access to all the approved therapies or not. This also highlights the importance of deciding the kind of control arm that we use when we design trials in the advancedsetting. Depending on the type of control arm and the access of patients to these types of clinical trials, we might influence the overall survival benefit in these cases. There is currently a dual strategy for treating patients diagnosed with stage IIIB or higher might be neoadjuvant therapy if we have macroscopically diagnosed disease, or it can be adjuvant therapy if we have a patient who has microscopic disease and therefore is not a candidate for immunotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting. We expect these patients to be around 40%, but also there will be patients diagnosed with stage IIIA and patients with stage IIB and IIC that will be candidates for adjuvant therapy. Finally, the absence of overall survival data, and also the presence of relapse-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival data associated with the toxicity profile of these therapies, are important to be discussed and are part of this shared decision in terms of the treatment that these patients can be offered at this timepoint that we're discussing. With that, I thank you for your attention and I look forward to seeing you again in the near future. Thank you.

Is it true that … cold water plunges boost immunity?
Is it true that … cold water plunges boost immunity?

Yahoo

time3 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Is it true that … cold water plunges boost immunity?

'It's a long-held belief that taking to the waters is good for your health,' says Mike Tipton, a professor of human and applied physiology at the University of Portsmouth. From Roman frigidariums to Thomas Jefferson's foot baths, cold immersion has long been seen as curative. But does modern science support the idea that it boosts immunity? The answer: it's complicated. While cold water immersion does activate the body, that's not the same as strengthening the immune system. 'When you immerse yourself in cold water, your body undergoes the cold shock response,' says Tipton. 'You get rapid breathing, a spike in heart rate and a surge of stress hormones such as adrenaline and cortisol.' This may explain why people feel more alert or energised after a cold dip. But does it mean you're less likely to get sick? Many studies into the effects focus on immune cell activity in the blood – which can increase after cold exposure – but that doesn't always translate into fewer infections. 'It's easy to cherry-pick results,' says Tipton. He points to a frequently quoted Dutch study in which people who ended their daily hot showers with at least 30 seconds under cold water took 29% fewer sick days. While it's often used as an example of the powers of cold plunges, those participants actually reported the same number of infections as those who didn't have a cold shower. 'That might reflect increased resilience or just a willingness to push through because of being part of a study,' says Tipton, rather than better immunity. It may also be that regular cold plungers simply have a healthier lifestyle overall. A recent study by Tipton's team found that indoor and outdoor swimmers had fewer respiratory infections than non-swimmers, suggesting it may be the exercise, not the cold, doing the work. One thing is clear: too much cold is harmful. 'If your core temperature drops too far, it can suppress the immune system,' he says. His advice? Keep it short – no more than 90 seconds.

NewAmsterdam Pharma Announces Positive Topline Alzheimer's Disease Data from BROADWAY Clinical Trial
NewAmsterdam Pharma Announces Positive Topline Alzheimer's Disease Data from BROADWAY Clinical Trial

Yahoo

time3 hours ago

  • Yahoo

NewAmsterdam Pharma Announces Positive Topline Alzheimer's Disease Data from BROADWAY Clinical Trial

-- Pre-specified analyses show that obicetrapib treatment leads to statistically significant and clinically meaningful reductions in the primary outcome measure of Alzheimer's disease biomarker in both the full ITT population (p<0.002) and in ApoE4 carriers (p=0.0215), supporting the emerging link between CETP-inhibition and prevention of AD pathology -- -- NewAmsterdam to present results during the AAIC conference in July -- NAARDEN, The Netherlands and MIAMI, June 09, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- NewAmsterdam Pharma Company N.V. (Nasdaq: NAMS or 'NewAmsterdam' or the 'Company'), a late-stage, clinical biopharmaceutical company developing oral, non-statin medicines for patients at risk of cardiovascular disease ('CVD') with elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ('LDL-C'), for whom existing therapies are not sufficiently effective or well-tolerated, today announced positive topline data from prespecified Alzheimer's Disease ('AD') biomarker analyses in the Phase 3 BROADWAY clinical trial (NCT05142722). The pivotal Phase 3 BROADWAY study was primarily designed to evaluate the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ('LDL-C') lowering efficacy of obicetrapib in adult patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease ('ASCVD') and/or heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia ('HeFH'), whose LDL-C is not adequately controlled, despite being on maximally tolerated lipid-lowering therapy. As part of this pivotal registration trial for lowering LDL-C, a pre-specified sub-study was conducted to assess the effect of obicetrapib on plasma biomarkers of AD in both the full study population and in patients carrying the ApoE4 gene. 'These findings strongly support a potential preventive strategy for Alzheimer's disease,' said Michael Davidson, M.D., Chief Executive Officer of NewAmsterdam Pharma. 'In this study obicetrapib, a potent CETP inhibitor, improved the progression of key plasma biomarkers of AD pathology over a 12-month period in patients with ASCVD. These data further differentiate obicetrapib and underscore the critical role CETP inhibition may have in mitigating the risk of AD progression, alongside the significant cardiovascular benefits obicetrapib has shown in our pivotal Phase 3 trials.' The AD sub-study results from BROADWAY build on genetic, Mendelian randomization, and NewAmsterdam's pre-clinical data and data from its Phase 2a clinical proof of concept trial. 'These findings have significant implications for AD prevention, especially for the over 25% of the population that carries one or two ApoE4 risk alleles and who currently lack FDA-approved prevention options,' said Philip Scheltens, professor emeritus at Amsterdam University Medical Center. 'The ability to reduce pathological biomarker progression suggests a potential to alter disease trajectory in this population, thereby delaying or preventing the onset of symptoms. The established safety profile of obicetrapib, demonstrated across multiple large clinical trials, combined with its oral administration, may greatly facilitate clinical implementation.' 'These results are the culmination of over two decades of dedicated scientific research. Approximately two thirds of patients with Alzheimer's disease carry the ApoE4 risk isoform that is associated with a much greater risk of developing AD, and the data shared today support our belief that CETP inhibition and specifically raising small functional HDL particles offers a novel and targeted approach to reducing that risk,' said John Kastelein, M.D., Ph.D., FESC, Chief Scientific Officer of NewAmsterdam. 'When viewed alongside the totality of evidence generated to date, including improvements in LDL-C, small LDL particles, Lipoprotein (a), and key biomarkers associated with diabetes and renal function, these novel data on the prevention of AD-associated pathology further strengthen obicetrapib's profile as a uniquely differentiated therapy with the potential to address multiple interrelated drivers of chronic cardiometabolic disease and neurodegeneration.' The Company plans to present the full results from the AD sub-study analysis in a Developing Topics oral presentation at the Alzheimer's Association International Conference in Toronto at the end of July 2025. Design of the Pivotal Phase 3 BROADWAY Clinical Trial The 52-week, global, pivotal, Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of 10 mg obicetrapib compared to placebo as an adjunct to maximally tolerated lipid-lowering therapies in patients with ASCVD and/or HeFH whose LDL-C is not adequately controlled. The trial was conducted at sites in North America, Europe, Asia and Australia. A total of 2,530 patients were randomized 2:1 to receive 10 mg obicetrapib or placebo dosed as a once-daily oral treatment, with or without food for 52 weeks. The mean baseline LDL-C for enrolled patients in the obicetrapib arm was approximately 100 mg/dL despite high intensity statin use reported by nearly 70% of patients during screening. Females comprised approximately 34% of the trial population and the median age of participants at baseline was 65 years. The primary endpoint was LS mean percent change from baseline in LDL-C of obicetrapib 10 mg compared to placebo after 84 days which showed a reduction of 33% with imputation. Secondary endpoints also included percent changes from baseline of obicetrapib 10 mg compared to placebo in ApoB, Lp(a), ApoA1, HDL-C, non-HDL-C, total cholesterol, and triglycerides at day 84, and on LDL-C levels at days 180 and 365. Other exploratory outcome measures included time from randomization until the first confirmed occurrence of MACE in the obicetrapib arm compared to placebo. The trial also evaluated the safety and tolerability profile of obicetrapib. Alzheimer's Sub-Study Trial In BROADWAY, a pre-specified AD sub-study was designed to assess plasma AD biomarkers in patients enrolled in the BROADWAY trial and evaluated the effects of longer duration of therapy (12 months) with a prespecified population of ApoE3/4 or 4/4 carriers. The sub-study included 1727 patients, including 367 ApoE4 carriers. The primary outcome measure was p-tau217 absolute and percent change over 12 months. Additional outcome measures included neurofilament light chain ('NFL'), glial fibrillary acidic protein ('GFAP'), p-tau181, and Aβ42/40 ratio absolute and percent change over 12 months. NewAmsterdam observed statistically significant lower absolute changes in p-tau217 compared to placebo over 12 months in both the full ITT population (p<0.002) and in ApoE4 carriers (p=0.0215). Design of the Phase 2a Alzheimer's Trial The open-label and single-arm trial was designed to assess the pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability of obicetrapib 10 mg in early AD patients carrying at least one copy of ApoE4. A total of 13 patients were given 10 mg obicetrapib and followed for 24 weeks. NewAmsterdam observed reductions in the levels of 24- and 27-hydroxycholestrol in both plasma and cerebrospinal fluid. Overall, obicetrapib was observed to be well-tolerated. No serious adverse events ('AEs') were reported, nor were any AEs considered to be related to the study drug. About Obicetrapib Obicetrapib is a novel, oral, low-dose CETP inhibitor that NewAmsterdam is developing to overcome the limitations of current LDL-lowering treatments. In each of the Company's Phase 2 trials, ROSE2, TULIP, ROSE, and OCEAN, as well as the Company's Phase 3 BROOKLYN, BROADWAY and TANDEM trials, evaluating obicetrapib as monotherapy or combination therapy, the Company observed statistically significant LDL-lowering combined with a side effect profile similar to that of placebo. The Company commenced the Phase 3 PREVAIL cardiovascular outcomes trial in March 2022, which is designed to assess the potential of obicetrapib to reduce occurrences of MACE. The Company completed enrollment of PREVAIL in April 2024 and randomized over 9,500 patients. Commercialization rights of obicetrapib in Europe, either as a monotherapy or as part of a fixed-dose combination with ezetimibe, have been exclusively granted to the Menarini Group, an Italy-based, leading international pharmaceutical and diagnostics company. About NewAmsterdam NewAmsterdam Pharma (Nasdaq: NAMS) is a late-stage biopharmaceutical company whose mission is to improve patient care in populations with metabolic diseases where currently approved therapies have not been adequate or well tolerated. We seek to fill a significant unmet need for a safe, well-tolerated and convenient LDL-lowering therapy. In multiple phase 3 trials, NewAmsterdam is investigating obicetrapib, an oral, low-dose and once-daily CETP inhibitor, alone or as a fixed-dose combination with ezetimibe, as LDL-C lowering therapies to be used as an adjunct to statin therapy for patients at risk of CVD with elevated LDL-C, for whom existing therapies are not sufficiently effective or well tolerated. Forward-Looking Statements Certain statements included in this document that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements for purposes of the safe harbor provisions under the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements generally are accompanied by words such as 'believe,' 'may,' 'will,' 'estimate,' 'continue,' 'anticipate,' 'intend,' 'expect,' 'should,' 'would,' 'plan,' 'predict,' 'potential,' 'seem,' 'seek,' 'future,' 'outlook' and similar expressions that predict or indicate future events or trends or that are not statements of historical matters. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding the Company's business and strategic plans, the Company's commercial opportunity, the therapeutic and curative potential of the Company's product candidate, the Company's clinical trials and the timing for enrolling patients, the timing and forums for announcing data, the achievement and timing of regulatory approvals, and plans for commercialization. These statements are based on various assumptions, whether or not identified in this document, and on the current expectations of the Company's management and are not predictions of actual performance. These forward-looking statements are provided for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to serve as and must not be relied on as a guarantee, an assurance, a prediction, or a definitive statement of fact or probability. Actual events and circumstances are difficult or impossible to predict and may differ from assumptions. Many actual events and circumstances are beyond the control of the Company. These forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including changes in domestic and foreign business, market, financial, political, and legal conditions; risks related to the approval of the Company's product candidate and the timing of expected regulatory and business milestones, including potential commercialization; whether topline, initial or preliminary results from a particular clinical trial will be predictive of the final results of that trial and whether results of early clinical trials will be indicative of the results of later clinical trials, or whether projections regarding clinical outcomes will reflect actual results in future clinical trials or clinical use of our product candidate, if approved; the potential for varying interpretation of the AD sub-study results; ability to negotiate definitive contractual arrangements with potential customers; the impact of competitive product candidates; ability to obtain sufficient supply of materials; global economic and political conditions, including the Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Hamas conflicts; the effects of competition on the Company's future business; and those factors described in the Company's public filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Additional risks related to the Company's business include, but are not limited to: uncertainty regarding outcomes of the Company's ongoing clinical trials, particularly as they relate to regulatory review and potential approval for its product candidate; risks associated with the Company's efforts to commercialize a product candidate; the Company's ability to negotiate and enter into definitive agreements on favorable terms, if at all; the impact of competing product candidates on the Company's business; intellectual property related claims; the Company's ability to attract and retain qualified personnel; and ability to continue to source the raw materials for the Company's product candidate. If any of these risks materialize or the Company's assumptions prove incorrect, actual results could differ materially from the results implied by these forward-looking statements. There may be additional risks that the Company does not presently know or that the Company currently believes are immaterial that could also cause actual results to differ from those contained in the forward-looking statements. In addition, forward-looking statements reflect the Company's expectations, plans, or forecasts of future events and views as of the date of this document and are qualified in their entirety by reference to the cautionary statements herein. The Company anticipates that subsequent events and developments may cause the Company's assessments to change. These forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as representing the Company's assessment as of any date subsequent to the date of this communication. Accordingly, undue reliance should not be placed upon the forward-looking statements. Neither the Company nor any of its affiliates undertakes any obligation to update these forward-looking statements, except as may be required by law. Company ContactMatthew PhilippeP: Media ContactSpectrum Science on behalf of NewAmsterdamJaryd LeadyP: 1-856-803-7855jleady@ Investor ContactPrecision AQ on behalf of NewAmsterdamAustin MurtaghP:

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store