Schneider Shorts 28.07.2023 – For the first time in the world, we succeeded

Schneider Shorts of 28 July 2023 – shocking practices at Shock, forged clinical trials in Italy exposed by UK academics, another phony superconductor announced, two clever methods to prevent Alzheimer’s, an unusual way to earn with scamferences, and finally, London professor’s quack scam under investigation.

---

---

Industry Giants

Lowdell’s Serious Incident

The British newspaper Private Eye reports again about the scams of Mark Lowdell, professor at UCL and a former collaborator of the deadly trachea transplanters Paolo Macchiarini and Martin Birchall, who got obscenely rich thanks to stem cells quackery.

This yet another incredible investigation by Patricia Murray, and the Eye duly credits her.

“A damning “serious incident” report obtained by the Eye under Freedom of Information legislation, found that lack of proper oversight left the NHS trust’s pioneering Centre for Cell, Gene and Tissue Therapeutics (CCGTT) riven with undisclosed conflicts of interest. For-profit companies shared its state and facilities – two directly linked to the private clinics pushing the dodgy treatments.

Director of the CCGTF at the time was Professor Mark Lowdell, who was juggling three jobs. He worked for the the hospital, for the neighbouring University College London and as a successful international biotech entrepreneur”

And this is how Lowdell has been making his millions on the side while pretending to work for a public hospital:

“Key was US-based multinational INmune Bio Inc, of which Lowdell was a so-founder. He had signed one contract with the Anthony Nolan charity for the Royal Free and another with the charity wearing his INmune hat. in return for £200 per cord, INmune was permitted by the charity to process and store extracted cell products and sell them on to third parties – but only tor approved research and treatment.
One of those third parties was LifeP1us, which Lowdell had set up with cosmetic surgeon Afshin Mosahebi, who was a Royal Free and UCL colleague. LifePlus was also advertising questionable “stem cell” therapies for cosmetic and orthopedic conditions. its “quality manager” was a third Royal Free staffer, head of production and regulation Arjmand Aziz.”

As contracts revealed, the bulk of money went to INmune, hence into Lowdell’s private pocket, and the charity trust got next to nothing. The trust even signed a contract for a specialist software with another Lowdell company, Autolomous. The umbilical cords donated to charity by clueless new mothers were passed on by INmune to the cosmetic doctor stem cell quack Aamer Khan, owner of the Harley Street Skin Clinic (HSSC):

“They were advertised as “treatments” for everything from erectile dysfunction lo Parkinson’s. and one woman with chronic lung disease had spent more than £20,000 for no benefit”

As the Eye mentions, Khan currently also sells a crazy German anti-aging therapy called “Goldic”, read about it here:

Lowdell insists he had absolutely no idea what Khan was doing with the donated umbilical cords which he sold him. Lowdell only resigned from LifePlus after Patricia Murray exposed him. He also left Royal Free in June 2022 following his retirement as director of the CCGTT. But the scam continues!

“According to the UCL website, Lowdell is still listed as having “qualified person status for the legal release of investigational cell and gene therapies”. His associated companies still subcontract and operate out of the CCGTT. […] However, INmune Bio’s US Securities and Exchange Commission filings show the Royal Free has received not a penny, while UCL has been pocketing yearly sums of between £300,000 and £586,000.”

A cunning scheme. Lowdell used to openly brag that UCL has no oversight over him, and indeed, even now the university shows exactly zero interest in investigating the affair. Why should they, the money is good! Their only problem is Patricia Murray, and yes, UCL did try to get at her with lawyers and threats.

But Royal Free did investigate, not because they are ethical or anything. They were perfectly OK with Lowdell’s and Birchall’s deadly trachea transplants before. But as you read, Lowdell got too greedy and fleeced off Royal Free, using their facilities, staff, materials, and never paying them a penny.

Royal Free’s “serious incident” report determined a breach of their own “specials” licence restrictions. In serious cases like chronic lung disease, the patient’s medical team should have been involved in any “specials” treatments, yet it wasn’t. There was no real risk-benefit analysis, and those in charge of it were physiotherapists instead of doctors. Royal Free refuses to tell if anyone was sanctioned, but they drew at least some conclusions: from now on all “specials” therapies have to be approved by a committee, all CCGTT staff must declare their conflicts of interests, and a legal team is busy reviewing past contracts.

“The Anthony Nolan charity, however, told the Eye it was “concerned and disappointed” by the trust’s failings and was looking, at the issues raised as a matter of urgency”

---

Scholarly Publishing

Remick Investigates!

A third episode of the trash-comedy show “Remick Investigates“!

In the previous two Friday Shorts episodes, Daniel Remick, professor of pathology at Boston University, USA, and Editor-in-Chief of the Wolters Kluwer-published journal Shock, did the following:

• Remick ordered the anonymous sleuth Aneurus Inconstans that they “must write a formal signed letter of complaint delineating the specific ethical issues or violations” in a paper by Salvatore Cuzzocrea, massive research cheater and Rector Magnificus of University of Messina in Sicily, with mafia connections in his family. Next to ordering the sleuth to reveal their identity, Remick announced that Cuzzocrea’s case will be investigated by the former’s close associate, the deputy editor Basilia Zingarelli (University of Messina alumnus, now professor at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, USA). Read here.
• Remick defended an utterly fraudulent paper by Cuzzocrea’s Messina colleagues around Francesco Squadrito: “Our journal Shock has determined that there is no credible evidence of scientific fraud” because “In 2007 it was common practice” and “images from these three figures were analyzed with proofig AI software and no evidence of image duplication was found.” Read here.

Aneurus sent Remick two more fraudulent papers by Cuzzocrea and his former mentor in London, Chris Thiemermann:

Salvatore Cuzzocrea , Emanuela Mazzon , Laura Dugo , Ivana Serraino , Tommaso Centorrino , Antonio Ciccolo , Fons A. J. Van De Loo , Domenico Britti , Achille P. Caputi, Christoph Thiemermann Inducible Nitric Oxide Synthase-Deficient Mice Exhibit Resistance to the Acute Pancreatitis Induced by Cerulein Shock (2002) doi: 10.1097/00024382-200205000-00013

The other reported paper from Thiemermann’s lab, Cuzzocrea et al Shock 2022, was even worse. Much worse. I describe it in this article about Thiemermann and his rotten institute:

Remick informed us in this regard:

“We have received the allegations of scientific misconduct and will start an investigation. Due to the complexities of the allegations a response may not be available until July 1, 2024.“

Here and before, Remick kept making up silly deadlines for clear-cut cases. But why?

Well, the mystery is easy to solve, and here are some clues. First of all, Cuzzocrea is presently member of Shock‘s editorial board. His former mentor Thiemermann is even one of “Consulting Board Members”.

But also: Remick authored seven papers with Thiemermann between 2014 and 2019. One of them, an editorial (Osuchowski et al, Abandon the mouse research ship? Not just yet!, Shock, 2014) even has Cuzzocrea among the authors!

This one is the most telling:

Marcin F. Osuchowski , Judith Hellman , Markus Huber-Lang , Claude Libert , Daniel G. Remick , Christoph Thiemermann , Basilia Zingarelli The Response to the Letter to the Editor Titled: “Is Triple Self-plagiarism “OK” If Only Made Transparent?” by Volker R Jacobs, MD, MBA Shock (2019) doi: 10.1097/shk.0000000000001294 

There, the group (which includes Remick, Thiemermann and Zingarelli) defended their own self-plagiarism and invited fellow editors to ignore ICMJE advice on double-publishing. Specifically, they protested against a Letter to Editor by Volker Jacobs, who wrote:

“Recently, three papers were listed within a week published in MEDLINE with identical title, authors and almost content ^(1–3). Three tables initially missing in one paper ⁽³⁾ were added as correction for a full match ⁽⁴⁾. All three are published by mayor international publishers, two papers by Springer ^{(1, 3)} and one by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins ⁽²⁾. At first sight, this fulfills without use of any plagiarism software the terms of triple redundant publication and triple self-plagiarism.”

These were the 3 papers, featuring :

1. Marcin F. Osuchowski, Alfred Ayala, Soheyl Bahrami, Michael Bauer, Mihaly Boros, Jean-Marc Cavaillon, Irshad H. Chaudry, Craig M. Coopersmith, Clifford Deutschman, Susanne Drechsler, Philip Efron, Claes Frostell, Gerhard Fritsch, Waldemar Gozdzik, Judith Hellman, Markus Huber-Lang, Shigeaki Inoue, Sylvia Knapp, Andrey V. Kozlov, Claude Libert, John C. Marshall, Lyle L. Moldawer, Peter Radermacher, Heinz Redl, Daniel G. Remick, Mervyn Singer, Christoph Thiemermann, Ping Wang, Willem Joost Wiersinga, Xianzhong Xiao, Basilia Zingarelli Minimum quality threshold in pre-clinical sepsis studies (MQTiPSS): an international expert consensus initiative for improvement of animal modeling in sepsis. Intensive Care Med Exp 2018; doi: 10.1186/s40635-018-0189-y
2. Osuchowski et al. Minimum Quality Threshold in Pre-Clinical Sepsis Studies (MQTiPSS): an international expert consensus initiative for improvement of animal modeling in sepsis. Shock 2018; DOI: 10.1097/SHK.0000000000001212
3. Osuchowski et al. Minimum Quality Threshold in Pre-Clinical Sepsis Studies (MQTiPSS): an international expert consensus initiative for improvement of animal modeling in sepsis. Infection 2018; DOI: 10.1007/s15010-018-1183-8

At that time, Remick was associate editor of Shock and the co-author on the triple-publication, Irshad H. Chaudry, was the Editor-in-Chief. Another name rings a bell: Markus Huber-Lang, Shock‘s editorial board member and professor of medicine at the University of Ulm in Germany, has just installed Thiemermann as visiting professor in his university clinic.

Basically, Remick is conflicted up to his neck, just like his editorial colleague Zingarelli, and he is in denial about both his and her conflicts. Remick is best mates with Thiemermann, he even jointly engaged in bad practices with him and Zingarelli, i.e. in self-plagiarism, for which they abused their editorial power, also to attack a critic.

This should normally preclude Remick from investigating any papers from Thiemermann’s lab or from University of Messina. In fact, Shock‘s Deputy Editor, Marc Jeschke MD PhD FACS FCAHS FCCM FRCS (C), Vice President Research at Hamilton Health Sciences in Canada, informed me:

“The publications committee of shock is conducting an independent investigation.
None of the editors are part of this.”

When I tried to learn more about this committee, Jeschke curtly warned me: “I recommend you let the process develop.” But this German-born champion of editorial ethics also engaged in self-plagiarism, in Shock even! He recycled without proper acknowledgement the clinical trial data from his earlier paper, Patsouris et al Cell Reports 2015:

Abdikarim Abdullahi, Peter Chen , Mile Stanojcic , Ali-Reza Sadri , Natalie Coburn , Marc G. Jeschke IL-6 Signal From the Bone Marrow is Required for the Browning of White Adipose Tissue Post Burn Injury Shock (2017) doi: 10.1097/shk.0000000000000749 

It seems, none of Shock‘s editors can be trusted with basic research ethics. Aneurus informed the deputy editors and the publisher about two more papers by Cuzzocrea and Thiemermann:

Ioannis Virlos , Emanuela Mazzon , Ivana Serraino , Rosanna Di Paola , Tiziana Genovese , Domenico Britti , Christoph Thiemerman, Ajith Siriwardena , Salvatore Cuzzocrea Pyrrolidine Dithiocarbamate Reduces the Severity of Cerulein-Induced Murine Acute Pancreatitis Shock (2003) doi: 10.1097/01.shk.0000093543.78705.aa

Emanuela Mazzon , Laura Dugo, Angelina De Sarro , Jia-He Li , Achille P. Caputi, Jie Zhang , Salvatore Cuzzocrea Beneficial Effects Of GPI 6150, an Inhibitor of Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase in a Rat Model of Splanchnic Artery Occlusion and Reperfusion Shock (2002) doi: 10.1097/00024382-200203000-00011

Let’s see how Wolters Kluwer resolves this. At some point, Aneurus had to ask Remick to investigate HIMSELF:

Kyros Ipaktchi , Aladdein Mattar , Andreas D. Niederbichler , Laszlo M. Hoesel , Mark R. Hemmila , Grace L. Su , Daniel G. Remick, Stewart C. Wang , Saman Arbabi TOPICAL p38MAPK INHIBITION REDUCES DERMAL INFLAMMATION AND EPITHELIAL APOPTOSIS IN BURN WOUNDS Shock (2006) doi: 10.1097/01.shk.0000225739.13796.f2 

Remick informed us:

“We have received your allegation of scientific misconduct which will be investigated. This investigation should be complete by November 1, 2023.”

---

Painful fraud

While other academics write educated treatises about bad science with exactly zero novel information, here is one who exposed actual fraud in pain research. Amanda Williams is professor of clinical health psychology at University College London (UCL) in UK, and she just published this paper:

Amanda C de C Williams Dubious data and contamination of the research literature on pain British Journal of Pain (2023) doi: 10.1177/20494637231190866

“With several colleagues, I have recently stumbled into investigating what we call ‘untrustworthy’ data in pain. The story started when we were updating a systematic review and meta-analysis of psychological interventions for chronic pain.¹ Three of the 70+ eligible papers had results that were staggeringly better than anyone else’s, by an order of magnitude. The same team had produced all three papers. Either they had discovered spectacularly effective ways of delivering CBT and exercise to people with musculoskeletal (spinal) pain, in which case it was urgent that we all learned from the trials, or there was a problem with their data.

Our questions to the authors about their treatments, even when answered, did not elicit useful information, and the author team itself seemed rather less expert than we expected.

We systematically searched for their RCTs on physical and/or psychological interventions for spinal pain and found 10 trials. […] we applied the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth review group’s Trustworthiness Screening Tool, developed for routine use by this group on trials eligible for meta-analysis. This tool checks for features of good practice, such as trial preregistration, and publicly available ethics application, and also examines feasibility and distributions of data, from baselines and from tests. This generated concerns about eight of the ten trials, such as identical data at baseline across trials, zero attrition and all changes extraordinarily large. We published our findings.²“

The 10 fraudulent papers and their authors are referenced in the original yet paywalled investigation by Williams et al:

O’Connell, Neil E.; Moore, R. Andrew; Stewart, Gavin; Fisher, Emma; Hearn, Leslie; Eccleston, Christopher; Williams, Amanda C de C Investigating the veracity of a sample of divergent published trial data in spinal pain PAIN (2023)| DOI: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002659

Retraction Watch reported in November 2022 about three of the retractions and named the accused: Marco Monticone of the University of Cagliari in Italy.

After I was provided with the pdf and additional information, here are the 10 studies:

• Monticone M, Baiardi P, Vanti C, Ferrari S, Nava T, Montironi C, Rocca B, Foti C, Teli M. Chronic neck pain and treatment of cognitive and behavioural factors: results of a randomised controlled clinical trial. Eur Spine J 2012 DOI: 10.1007/s00586-012-2287-y
• Scheduled for Retraction: Monticone M, Ferrante S, Rocca B, Baiardi P, Dal Farra F, Foti C. Effect of a long-lasting multidisciplinary program on disability and fear-avoidance behaviors in patients with chronic low back pain: results of a randomized controlled trial. Clin J Pain 2013 DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e31827fef7e
• Monticone M, Ambrosini E, Rocca B, Magni S, Brivio F, Ferrante S. A multidisciplinary rehabilitation programme improves disability, kinesiophobia and walking ability in subjects with chronic low back pain: results of a randomised controlled pilot study. Eur Spine J 2014; DOI: 10.1007/s00586-014-3478-5
• Monticone M, Ferrante S, Teli M, Rocca B, Foti C, Lovi A, Bruno MB. Management of catastrophising and kinesiophobia improves rehabilitation after fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis and stenosis. A randomised controlled trial. Eur Spine J 2014 DOI: 10.1007/s00586-013-2889-z
• Monticone M, Ambrosini E, Rocca B, Cazzaniga D, Liquori V, Foti C. Group-based task-oriented exercises aimed at managing kinesiophobia improved disability in chronic low back pain. Eur J Pain 2016 DOI: 10.1007/s00586-013-2889-z
• Monticone M, Ambrosini E, Cazzaniga D, Rocca B, Motta L, Cerri C, Brayda-Bruno M, Lovi A. Adults with idiopathic scoliosis improve disability after motor and cognitive rehabilitation: results of a randomised controlled trial. Eur Spine J 2016 DOI: 10.1007/s00586-016-4528-y
• Retracted: Monticone M, Ambrosini E, Rocca B, Cazzaniga D, Liquori V, Pedrocchi A, Vernon H. Group-based multimodal exercises integrated with cognitive-behavioural therapy improve disability, pain and quality of life of subjects with chronic neck pain: a randomized controlled trial with one-year follow-up. Clin Rehabil 2017 DOI: 10.1177/0269215516651979
• Monticone M, Ambrosini E, Vernon H, Rocca B, Finco G, Foti C, Ferrante S. Efficacy of two brief cognitive-behavioral rehabilitation programs for chronic neck pain: results of a randomized controlled pilot study. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2018 DOI: 10.23736/S1973-9087.18.05206-1
• Retracted: Monticone M, Ambrosini E, Rocca B, Cazzaniga D, Liquori V, Lovi A, Brayda-Bruno M. Multimodal exercises integrated with cognitive-behavioural therapy improve disability of patients with failed back surgery syndrome: a randomized controlled trial with one-year follow-up. Disabil Rehabil 2020 DOI: 10.1080/09638288.2020.1863480
• Retracted: Monticone M, Ambrosini E, Portoghese I, Rocca B. Multidisciplinary program based on early management of psychological factors reduces disability of patients with subacute low back pain. Results of a randomised controlled study with one year follow-up. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2021 DOI: 10.23736/S1973-9087.21.06696-X

This is how it ended:

“We then approached the authors of the six journals that had published these trials (see³) with a copy of the published paper,² expressing concern. Three of the journals instigated investigations consistent with the COPE (Committee on Publishing Ethics) guidelines they endorsed (as does the British Journal of Pain). This resulted in two retractions by journals and one by the trial authors. Of the other three, one (which had published four of the papers concerned) wrote to the first author, were told he was unavailable, and decided to take it no further [European Spine Journal, -LS] ; the two others appeared to find it distasteful that we had raised the subject, implying that we were behaving unprofessionally, and took the first author’s assurances at face value. One of those has since reconsidered and retracted the paper [retraction in The Clinical Journal of Pain not published yet -LS]; the other (though fully signed up to COPE) preferred resolution by ‘academic debate’, as if authenticity of data is a matter of personal preference [Eur J Pain , -LS]. We declined.”

Williams dedicated a paragraph to Retraction Watch in her British Journal of Pain article (“a highly informative and reliable source of information“), and added:

“There is a fightback. Apart from Retraction Watch, Elisabeth Bik is a microbiologist with a real gift for spotting manipulated (rotated, cropped, etc.,) images in scientific papers, from microscopy to genetic sequences. She runs the Science Integrity Digest, https://scienceintegritydigest.com/, which makes for sobering reading…”

Bik’s blog is great indeed, pity she doesn’t have time to write more often. Yet I can’t recall Retraction Watch actually investigating research misconduct, rather they report about the results of accomplished investigations by journals and institutions, while always happy to claim or be given credit. In any case, I informed Prof Williams that there are in fact others doing the “fightback”. Even against her own UCL. She sounded interested.

Update 3.08.2023: the above text erroneously attributed the refused retraction due to “academic debate” to the wrong journal. The error was now corrected, it was in fact European J of Pain, and its then editor Luis Garcia-Larrea. Amanda Williams told me that the real troublemakers were “the European Spine Journal who published four of the papers, took Dr Monticone at his word when he said he was too sick to respond, but did not respond when we pointed out that he was corresponding with other editors (and continues to publish), so they should try again.“

The Editor-in-Chief of European Spine Journal is the Belgian surgeon Robert Gunzburg, who looks like he fell out of a trashy French film.

---

Science Breakthroughs

For the first time in the world, we succeeded

Everyone and their dog, at least in the physicist fraudster community, hurries to claim a discovery of a superconductor. Maybe that’s because Nature agreed to publish such trash even if it is very likely to be fraudulent.

Meanwhile, the most famous superconductive fraudsters, Ranga Dias and Ashkan Salamat, are about to face their second joint retraction, after one in Nature, now in Physical Review Letters. Durkee et al 2021 is about to be retracted for fraud, as Nature proudly reports:

“The findings back up the allegations of data fabrication/falsification convincingly,” PRL’s editors wrote in an e-mail obtained by Nature”

But what about Dias’ and Salamat’s second Nature paper about magic superconductors?

“Asked about community trust in Dias’s research published by Nature, Ziemelis [chief physical sciences editor at Nature, -LS], explains that each manuscript is evaluated independently, suggesting that the 2022 retraction had no bearing on the consideration of the paper published this year. “Our editors make decisions [about accepting manuscripts] based solely on whether research meets our criteria for publication,” he says. “If concerns are raised with us, we will always investigate them carefully.””

My advice to Karl Ziemelis is to treat each dog turd on its own merit also, before stepping into it.

Well, dear Dr Ziemelis, here is a hot Nature candidate for you! A preprint, fresh from South Korea:

Sukbae Lee, Ji-Hoon Kim , Young-Wan Kwon The First Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor arXiv (2023) doi: 10.48550/arxiv.2307.12008 

It starts with:

“For the first time in the world, we succeeded in synthesizing the room-temperature superconductor”

And ends with:

“We believe that our new development will be a brand-new historical event that opens a new era for humankind”

The preprint is already being debunked on PubPeer and on blogs. There are two preprints, in fact, here is the other one:

Sukbae Lee , Jihoon Kim , Hyun-Tak Kim , Sungyeon Im , SooMin An , Keun Ho Auh Superconductor Pb10−xCux(PO4)6O showing levitation at room temperature and atmospheric pressure and mechanism arXiv (2023) doi: 10.48550/arxiv.2307.12037 

Both with lead authors Sukbae Lee (who claims to be CEO of a thing called Q-centre) and Ji-hoon Kim (who claims to be R&D Director of same Q-centre). What might this Q- Centre be? Past press release by Sungkyunkwan University mentions:

“The Q Center was established by the Ministry of Science and ICT’s project to create a quantum information science research ecosystem with 49.3 billion [~35 Million Euro, -LS] research funds for five years from 2020. It supports quantum information science research and development. Q Center widely supports creating an ecosystem for research and development of quantum information science, including fostering skilled workers in quantum information science, supporting quantum device process, utilizing quantum cloud, and establishing related policies.”

Confusing is that the Q-Centre website names someone else as its director, not Sukbae Lee. Even more confusing is that the real Q-Center has a different address, in a different city even, from where Lee’s and Kim’s “Q-Centre “is. Even more confusing is where Lee’s Q-centre is located:

Anyway, here is yet another paper from March 2023, in a Korean journal, by these same clowns who create room temperature superconductors in their mum’s kitchen:

Sukbae Lee , Jihoon Kim , Sungyeon Im , SooMin An , Young-Wan Kwon , Keun Ho Auh Consideration for the development of room-temperature ambient-pressure superconductor (LK-99) Journal of the Korean Crystal Growth and Crystal Technology (2023) doi: 10.6111/jkcgct.2023.33.2.061 

Its abstract stated:

“we summarize the theoretical and experimental basis for the characteristics and discovery of the world’s first superconducting material surpassing the critical temperature of 97°C at atmospheric pressure.”

As you see, these older manuscripts have more authors, which ACS Information Age was able to explain with the “speculation that the trio is expecting a Nobel Prize for their work (a maximum of three people can share a Nobel Prize).” I am sure they do.

The Independent quoted several sceptical scientists. Everyone hides behind the need to peer review before forming an opinion. Well, Dias’ fake superconductor passed peer review. In Nature. Twice.

---

Build-up of waste products

BBC informs us how to prevent Alzheimer’s, and it’s Mindfulness. Just relax and breath in deeply for 20 minutes a few times a week. Here is the study BBC celebrated, from the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA:

Jungwon Min , Jeremy Rouanet , Alessandra Cadete Martini , Kaoru Nashiro , Hyun Joo Yoo , Shai Porat , Christine Cho , Junxiang Wan , Steve W. Cole , Elizabeth Head , Daniel A. Nation , Julian F. Thayer , Mara Mather Modulating heart rate oscillation affects plasma amyloid beta and tau levels in younger and older adults Scientific Reports (2023) doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-30167-0 

It had to be from California, right?

The study is based on the clinical trial NCT03458910 (Heart Rate Variability and Emotion Regulation, HRV-ER) which was terminated due to “COVID-19 increased risk of participation“. It had no control arm, 193 participants “taking antidepressant, anti-anxiety medication and/or attending psychotherapy” were enrolled, only 108 entered final analysis. The peer-reviewed paper now pronounces them as “Healthy participants without serious medical conditions” and omits the rest. Half of those were instructed to decrease their heart rate by “by imagining a serene scene, listening to relaxing sounds, and closing their eyes – essentially, mindfulness meditation.” The other half “followed a breathing exercise on a computer screen” which the authors decided should increase their heart rate.

BBC quotes the lead author:

“When they looked at participants’ blood samples four weeks into their practice, the results came as a “surprise”, says Mara Mather, professor of gerontology, psychology and biomedical engineering at the University of Southern California and one of authors of the study. The breathing exercises aimed at increasing heart rate variability decreased levels of amyloid beta. The mindfulness exercises, which decreased heart rate variability, made those levels higher. […]

Mather and her team hadn’t expected the levels of amyloid beta to be “affected so robustly”. And it wasn’t just for older adults who already might have been more susceptible to having higher levels of amyloid beta. “The effects were significant in both younger and older adults,” Mather says.

“This is an intriguing finding because, in healthy adults, lower plasma levels of amyloid beta are associated with lower risk of getting Alzheimer’s disease later,” she says. “Slow-paced breathing might have benefits not only for emotional well-being – but also for improving biomarkers associated with Alzheimer’s disease.”

The researchers aren’t sure why, exactly, this might be. But one hypothesis is that slow, deliberate breathing may mimic some of the benefits of deep sleep, which research has found might clear neurotoxic waste products from the brain and nervous system at a faster rate. The build-up of these waste products seems to play a role in the development of Alzheimer’s.”

Her paper is a neurotoxic waste product.

---

An espresso a day keeps doctor away

But wait! There is a much better therapy to prevent Alzheimer’s! It’s coffee of course. But not any coffee, it has to be an Italian espresso.

The Independent informs:

“Drinking an espresso – even in a cocktail – a day might protect against Alzheimer’s disease, new research has found.

A study by the University of Verona in Italy showed the dark shot of coffee destroys rogue tau proteins that gather in the brain and kill neurons, a process that is believed to be involved in the onset of the neurodegenerative disease.

The study’s lead author, professor Mariapina D’Onofrio said: “Recent research has suggested that coffee could also have beneficial effects against certain neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer’s.

“Although the exact mechanisms that cause these conditions are still unclear, it’s thought that a protein called tau plays a significant role.”

This invigorating study, financed by the “Departments of Excellence” program of the Italian Ministry of University and Research, was published in an ACS journal, ACS even issued a press release!

Roberto Tira , Giovanna Viola , Carlo Giorgio Barracchia , Francesca Parolini , Francesca Munari , Stefano Capaldi , Michael Assfalg , Mariapina D’Onofrio Espresso Coffee Mitigates the Aggregation and Condensation of Alzheimer′s Associated Tau Protein Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry (2023) doi: 10.1021/acs.jafc.3c01072  

From the paper:

“In conclusion, we have presented a large body of evidence that espresso coffee, a widely consumed beverage, is a source of natural compounds showing beneficial properties in ameliorating tau-related pathologies. Our findings could pave the way for further investigation into the design of bioactive compounds in the prevention and treatment of tauopathies.”

All experiments were done in vitro: in solution or in cell culture. Yet it is presented by The Independent like a clinical masterpiece whose authors studied brains of espresso drinkers for tau fibrils:

“Lab experiments conducted showed the consumption of espresso prevents these from forming. Researchers also discovered the fibrils were shorter and didn’t form larger sheets as the concentration of espresso extract, caffeine or genistein increased.

“Shortened fibrils were found to be non-toxic to cells, and they did not act as ‘seeds’ for further aggregation,” professor D’Onofrio explained.

Her team pulled espresso shots from store-bought beans, then characterised their chemical makeup using a scanning technique called nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. They chose caffeine and trigonelline, both alkaloids, the flavonoid genistein and theobromine, a compound also found in chocolate, to focus on in further tests.

Professor D’Onofrio said that the beneficial effects of espresso were found whether the beverage was enjoyed on its own or mixed into a latte, Americano or even an espresso martini.”

The peer-reviewed paper never mentioned martinis. It must be a plea for industry funding should the expected cash from coffee and chocolate maker Nestle not suffice. Either that, or D’Onofrio is drunk again.

---

News in Brief

• Columbia University’s cheater professor Wei Gu corrects his fraudulent paper in Nature (Dominguez-Sola, Ying, Grandori, Ruggiero, Chen, Li , Galloway, Gu, Gautier, Dalla-Favera Non-transcriptional control of DNA replication by c-Myc Nature, 2007). The Correction notice from 29 June 2023 states: “In the version of this article initially published, the representative image shown in the lower-left panel of Figure 4e (buffer ethanol HFF-pB MycER) was an unintended duplication of the upper-right panel (a-amanitin 4-OHT HFF-pB). Moreover, a vertical line was inadvertently omitted from Figure 1e to indicate that the 15 samples were loaded on two western blot membranes, run in parallel, and an incorrect image was used for the ORC6 panel. […] These errors do not affect the conclusions of the manuscript.“

• Polish predatory conference scammers, using the likely made-up identity of a “Matteo Ferensby“, allegedly affiliated with University of Warsaw, found an original way to make money: suing the participants of online scamferences! Science brings this strange story, quoting a Swedish victim: “The Polish company behind the conference, Villa Europa, claims he still owes them fees for taking part, and is seeking payment through a Swedish court. After adding legal costs and interest to the bill, the company is demanding a whopping €80,000. Johansson isn’t alone. Dozens of researchers participated in the same series of online conferences on COVID-19 in 2020 and 2021 and many have received demands for payment from Villa Europa. At least five are being pursued through courts in their own countries for fees of tens of thousands of euros […] many of the demands hinge on the ruling of a Polish arbitration court whose very existence has been questioned by experts in the country.“

---