1- ANSES criticized by ANSES
The credibility of ANSES questioned by its own scientific council
In a report on the National Health Security Agency, independent experts are concerned about the “gap between science and expertise” within the institution and recommend a reform of its functioning.
No press release, no trace on the front page of its website: the report was put online discreetly, Friday March 10, by the National Agency for Food, Environmental and Health Safety. of work (Anses). And for good reason, the 139-page document, which Le Monde consulted, concerns the “credibility of the scientific expertise” carried out by the agency, and its conclusions are not flattering.
Glyphosate, neonicotinoids, SDHI fungicides: in recent years, in several sensitive issues, the opinions issued by the health authority have been at the center of heated controversies. To the point that the ANSES scientific council – made up of around thirty scientists, most of them independent of the agency – deemed it necessary to mandate a working group to analyze the situation and make recommendations. “This situation could, if not managed carefully, threaten the credibility of the agency,” warns the working group, created in the fall of 2020 and led by Pierre-Benoît Joly, president of the Inrae Occitanie-Toulouse center. .
Expertise is at the heart of “three major tensions”, notes the report. The first is “the need to take into account the most advanced scientific knowledge”. “The gap between science and expertise constitutes one of the most important factors in the erosion of credibility and ANSES does not always succeed in reducing this tension,” write the members of the scientific council. Second tension listed: “the urgency of rendering certain opinions”, leading to deviating from the usual rules of expertise to, ultimately, produce “fragile results”.
The third tension identified by the rapporteurs is institutional. Since 2015, ANSES has been responsible not only for assessing the risks linked to certain products (pesticides, biocides, veterinary medicines), but also for their regulation. It regulates their uses, grants or not marketing authorizations or decrees their withdrawal. Before 2015, it was the Directorate General for Food, at the Ministry of Agriculture, which was responsible for this mission. For the rapporteurs, this mixture of genres imposed on the agency contributes to “the erosion of its credibility”.
https://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/ ... _3244.htmlThe report:
https://www.anses.fr/fr/system/files/AV ... ertise.pdf2- The long-awaited study update: a rout!
December 5, 2023, CONTROVERSY AT ANSES:
According to this, there is no “unacceptable risk for consumers” provided that 11 of the 39 toxicological reference values (TRV) are adjusted, “by moderately reducing their current value by a reduction factor ranging from 1,5 to 3,3”
But this opinion includes in annex the divergent position of two members of the working group (out of 15 scientists gathered, 3 resigned, four wrote eight divergent opinions and certain observations were relegated to a simple “appendix”) Their criticisms relate to the way in which the expertise was carried out. They particularly deplore that the results of a cross-sectional analysis of the toxic effects of SDHIs were underestimated. “This analysis, innovative compared to the regulatory evaluation substance by substance, aimed to clarify the common or different organ toxicities for all the SDHIs assessed”. Indeed, the analysis revealed “numerous and shared damage between SDHIs for the kidney, endocrine disruption, neurotoxicity, eye diseases, damage to the adrenals, heart, liver, thyroid”. According to them, the minimization of these results "has the consequence of reducing the scope of collective expertise and of centering the results on the purely regulatory question of the analysis of VTRs", whereas it would have been necessary "to have a broader vision of the problem of SDHI” instead of a simple “academic guarantee”.
https://alerte-medecins-pesticides.fr/r ... sier-sdhi/The bogus ANSES study:
https://www.anses.fr/fr/content/nouvell ... aceutiques3- The first consequences on humans with resistant and deadly mutant fungi: Solid-state NMR to understand pulmonary aspergillosis
Spores of fungal agents such as Aspergillus fumigatus, inhaled by immunocompromised hosts, can lead to fatal illnesses. In work published in the journal PNAS, scientists from the Institute of Chemistry and Biology of Membranes and Nanoobjects (CNRS/University of Bordeaux/Bordeaux INP) and the European Institute of Chemistry and Biology (CNRS/University of Bordeaux /Inserm), in collaboration with the Pasteur Institute, have developed a new approach using solid-state NMR spectroscopy to characterize, at the atomic scale, the evolution of the cell wall of its spores throughout their growth cycle. life.
https://www.inc.cnrs.fr/fr/cnrsinfo/la- ... pulmonaireThe multifungicide resistance status of Aspergillus fumigatus populations in arable soils and in the wider European environment
This study also shows that in addition to azole resistance, several A. fumigatus lines carrying TR-based CYP51A variants also developed acquired resistance to methyl benzimidazole carbamate, the outer quinone inhibitor and to succinate dehydrogenase (Sdh) inhibitor fungicides through target site alterations. in the corresponding fungicidal target proteins; beta-tubulin (F200Y), cytochrome b (G143A), and Sdh B subunit (H270Y and H270R), respectively.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q ... i=89978449Candida Auris and Aspergillus fumigatus, again:
Mushrooms are resisting
In October 2022, the World Health Organization (WHO) warned of a growing threat: Mushrooms.
The international organization published a list of 19 species to be monitored as a priority and called for an intensification of scientific research on these too often neglected pathogens. “For around ten years, we have seen the emergence of new species, which could be linked to climate change also leading to a modification of the distribution areas of certain known fungi,” explains Sarah Dellière, researcher at the Pasteur Institute and microbiologist. at the Saint-Louis AP-HP hospital. Among these emergences, that of Candida auris is enough to attract attention. This yeast discovered in 2009 is harmless when it colonizes the skin. But when it enters the bloodstream, often following a medical procedure, it kills patients half the time.
Another example of a fungus whose resistance worries the hospital world is Aspergillus fumigatus, a mold ubiquitous in the environment and which constitutes a danger for people with weakened immune systems. “In the Netherlands, where tulip fields are watered with antifungals, 10% of patients who arrive at hospital with an Aspergillus infection have resistant strains.” To treat them, doctors must use a last-line antifungal that is particularly toxic for patients. Once again, the extraordinary capacity of microorganisms to adapt and environmental degradation are increasing health threats.
https://lejournal.cnrs.fr/articles/pand ... nel-retour(Bonus) Proof that it resists, “they” see it and say it:
https://www.arvalis.fr/sites/default/fi ... 555696.pdf