विज्ञान

Brussels (dpa) –  Health officials in Europe are reporting a "significant" uptick in foodborne illness across the continent in the past five years, with listeria killing one in 12 of those infected in 2024. In a joint report covering almost 40 countries, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) found increasing incidences not only of listeria, but also of campylobacter, salmonella and E. coli. Eggs, meat and ready-to-eat meals were listed as "among the most frequent sources of infection," according to the agencies, with salmonella among farm birds given as another possible source. Most cases of the diseases covered in the report were likely preventable if people followed practices such as "keeping the fridge at 5°C or below" and ensuring food is cooked thoroughly and prepared hygienically, the two bodies said. According to the EFSA and ECDC, there were almost 170,000 cases of campylobacter, a diarrhoeal illness often caused by handling raw chicken, and around half that number of salmonella cases in 2024. But while salmonella and campylobacter were by far the most widespread of the diseases tracked, listeria, sometimes called listeriosis, is more serious than either, with around 70% of cases resulting in hospitalization. "Even though contamination is rare, listeria [bacteria] can cause severe illness, which makes it one of the most serious foodborne threats we monitor," said Ole Heuer of ECDC. "A significant number of EU countries failed to meet all the targets for reducing salmonella in poultry, with only 14 member states reaching full compliance," said Frank Verdonck, head of EFSA’s biological hazards unit. The following information is not intended for publication dpa spr coh

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

Berlin (dpa) – Many children and young people grow up with insecurities that can weigh heavily on them. They worry about the future, and many develop fears and mental health issues. "That's precisely why they need secure anchors to help them navigate life," says health scientist Anne Kaman from Germany's University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, where she is deputy head of the Child Public Health research section. How children develop strength and self-confidence What strengthens children and young people's mental health? Kaman lists these key points: Attention, stable caregivers and safe places: those who feel well cared for can talk about their fears and stresses and cope with them more easily. Social anchors in everyday life: friendships, family rituals and reliable structures provide support. And they help to develop social skills. Experiences of self-efficacy: children need opportunities to experience that "I can make a difference." This helps them not only to “endure” difficult situations, but to "actively deal with them," she says. Confidence: In times of crisis, many children and young people experience a loss of control so it is important to encourage them. "A positive outlook on the future can then provide guidance." How parents model coping with stress is also important. Kaman says "It's not about ignoring difficulties, but about experiencing them as surmountable." This promotes inner strength and self-confidence in children – and this attitude is a key protective factor, especially in times of crisis. What resilience means "Resilience does not mean thinking 'nothing can hurt me,' but rather being aware that you are not alone in a crisis," says communication scientist Anna Frey. In other words, knowing that "I can get help, I have people I can turn to, I know tools I can use." There may be local points of contact for children, young people and carers in your area, where anyone with questions can access free and anonymous information and advice. Check whether there are helplines or resources online that can support you. The following information is not intended for publication dpa/tmn lue neb xxde arw

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

Frankfurt (dpa) – A heart attack is a medical emergency that requires an immediate call to the emergency services. However, there are sometimes warning signs that can show up weeks in advance that should prompt you to visit your doctor. Firstly, what exactly happens during a heart attack? A heart attack occurs when the vessels that supply the heart itself with oxygen and nutrients – known as coronary arteries – become blocked. One cause is calcium deposits building up in them, says the German Heart Foundation. As this is a gradual process, symptoms often appear before the blockage occurs, when the vessels are already narrowed in what is referred to as coronary heart disease. Symptoms that should be checked by a doctor A common symptom of coronary heart disease is angina pectoris. Sufferers feel pain and pressure or tightness in the chest, and it is difficult to breathe. If these symptoms occur during physical exertion and improve again at rest, do see a doctor. However, even milder symptoms can be precursors to a heart attack and should be medically investigated, says the German Heart Foundation. That could include if you have had problems climbing stairs for more than two weeks, feel weak, are experiencing unexplained shortness of breath or tire out quickly. When every minute counts It becomes critical when angina pectoris – pain, pressure or tightness and shortness of breath – suddenly occurs even at rest. This can indicate an imminent heart attack. This phase can last several weeks, but sometimes only a few hours. If you wake up at night with chest pain, you should call the emergency services immediately. In the event of a heart attack itself, every minute counts because there is a risk of permanent heart failure and cardiac arrest. Typical symptoms are: Sudden onset of severe pain in the chest or behind the breastbone that lasts longer than five minutes Pain that radiates to other parts of the body such as the arms (usually the left), upper abdomen, back, neck, jaw or shoulder blades Severe tightness and pressure in the chest – a feeling as if an elephant were sitting on your chest Severe burning in the chest, which may feel like heartburn Women's symptoms different But it is important to note that women often experience heart attacks differently. Women in particular sometimes experience non-specific symptoms such as pain in the upper abdomen, which can be confused with stomach ache, nausea or vomiting, dizziness, light-headedness or unexplained tiredness. Even professionals sometimes find it difficult to make the correct diagnosis immediately. But call the doctor if you are concerned as it is better to be safe than sorry. The following information is not intended for publication dpa/tmn hik tsn xxde arw

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

When your nose is running and you have a sore throat, you may be tempted to head to the chemist. Some home remedies can help relieve your symptoms though. Our specialists checked out all the options. Berlin (dpa) – If your nose is starting to feel stuffed up, or your throat is scratchy no need to rush right to the chemist. There are home remedies you can try too. But will they work? We asked a range of specialists. Whether it's chicken soup, throat compresses or foot baths, there are countless remedies and methods for treating colds that have often been passed down through generations. "We often have scientific explanations for how home remedies work," says Dr Andreas Michalsen, chief physician at Immanuel Hospital Berlin and professor of naturopathy at Berlin's Charité hospital. Usually there are no classic studies as they do not get the funding necessary. But that is not the case for medicinal plants, whose effects have usually been well researched. Baths, wraps and more: the benefits of heat treatments A tub of warm water, a little mustard powder or ginger powder to stimulate blood circulation, and you have a foot bath that is said to strengthen the immune system. "We know that the temperature of the feet also determines the temperature of the mucous membranes in the mouth and throat," says Michalsen. This can make life harder for some nasty bacteria. "It actually has an immune-boosting effect," he says. But do not use more than 2 tablespoons of mustard powder and apply for a maximum of 5 to 10 minutes, otherwise you run the risk of skin irritation and burns. Neck wraps with potatoes or linseed have a similar effect. The classic onion bags on the ears are also said to have anti-inflammatory and antibacterial properties. And hot chicken soup? It can be beneficial for colds – especially as it provides the weakened body with additional energy. Lab tests even suggest that chicken soup has an anti-inflammatory effect, though this effectiveness has not yet been proven in humans, says the Health Knowledge Foundation. Why pungent substances help with colds Nasturtium, horseradish and ginger are the classic pungent substances used to fight colds. "There are studies that show that these pungent substances can shorten colds," says Michalsen. Pungent substances have antiviral and antibacterial effects. From oil to tea: how medicinal plants bring relief As essential oils, bath additives or teas: medicinal plants come in various forms. Mixing thyme and primrose root, which alleviates coughing and shortens the duration of the illness, is very helpful and well researched, says Dr Heidi Braunewell, board member of the German Society for Phytotherapy and seminar leader at the Academy for Healthy Living in Germany. Plants such as sage, peppermint, ribwort plantain, marshmallow, ivy, sarsaparilla root and fennel have also proven effective. "Almost all of these highly concentrated medicinal plants have an antiviral or antibacterial effect," says Michalsen. While ivy, for example, helps with bronchial infections and relieves spasmodic coughs, liquorice root has an anti-inflammatory and expectorant effect, Braunewell says. When it comes to effectiveness, do not place your hopes in thyme and other herbs from your own garden or from the supermarket. Food-grade peppermint tea is unlikely to have antiviral and antibacterial effects. Instead, use medicinal teas from the chemist or a health food shop. It is important to bear in mind that mint and other medicinal plants containing essential oils should not be used on children under two years of age, as they can cause respiratory arrest. Apart from that, however, medicinal plants rarely carry risks or side effects. "It's almost impossible to poison yourself with thyme and sage. In terms of effectiveness, medicinal plants are less potent than chemically synthesised drugs," says Michalsen. When it comes to ready-made medicines, you should follow the package insert. Honey as a secret weapon? Whether in tea or eaten straight from the spoon, honey has anti-inflammatory, antibacterial and antiviral effects, says Michalsen. Honey can relieve coughing fits and promote better sleep, says the Health Knowledge Foundation. It does not have to be expensive Manuka honey – the claim that it is particularly effective "is mainly good marketing. Basically, all honey has the same properties. It is more important to make sure that it is not contaminated and, ideally, that it is organic," says Michalsen. Consider that children under 1 year of age should not consume honey because their intestinal flora is not yet fully developed and this can lead to poisoning from botulinum spores. When is it advisable to reduce fever? In Germany, calf compresses are the classic remedy for reducing fever. They are a traditional, naturopathic method for gentle fever reduction, involving wrapping the lower legs with lukewarm, damp cloths to help cool the body through evaporation. The cool compresses cause the body to release more heat, thereby reducing the fever, but there is no evidence to support this effect, says the Health Knowledge Foundation. Bear in mind you should not apply calf compresses if the patient has cold calves or chills, or if they have a urinary tract infection or circulatory problems. A gentler way to reduce fever is to drink teas made from lime blossom or hot elderberry juice. "They have an antiviral effect, slightly reduce fever and stimulate sweating," says Michalsen. In principle, a fever is not a bad thing. It is your body trying to fight viruses and bacteria by warming up. However, if the fever lasts for several days and remains above 39 degrees Celsius, doctors strongly advise you consult physician. Does your body need extra vitamin C? No. Although many medicinal products contain vitamin C, this does not generally improve a cold. "Of course, it's good to eat fresh food. However, vitamin C effervescent tablets or similar preparations are not necessary," says Michalsen. Instead, the doctor advises getting enough sleep and drinking plenty of fluids for all colds, the classic approach. The following information is not intended for publication dpa/tmn ada bzl nhr lue xxde arw

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

PFAS, the so-called forever chemicals, turn up in countless everyday items, even drinking water. Competely avoiding them at this level of saturation is difficult, but there are certain products you should be avoiding. Berlin (dpa) – PFAS, also known as "forever chemicals," are found in almost everything in daily life, including drinking water. A growing body of evidence has linked them to health problems such as a higher risk of cancer, and yet avoiding them is notoriously difficult. As the name suggests, these substances are highly persistent and take hundreds of years to break down, meaning the PFAS likely in your body will long outlast you. Because they repel dirt, water and grease, they are used in coatings, printing inks and even some medicines. It helps to look for products labelled PFAS-free or fluorocarbon-free when shopping, says Janna Kuhlmann, a chemicals expert at a German environmental organization. However, products containing PFAS are generally not required to carry warnings. Extra care is needed with coated or stain-repellent items. PFAS are often found in non-stick pan coatings, shoe and textile proofing treatments, and in upholstered furniture or carpets, the chemicals expert explained. PFAS are also used in single-use paper packaging such as takeaway cups or pizza boxes. There are alternatives for many products. If a product doesn't say whether PFAS are present, you may be able to find help in product scanning apps like Yuka and Think Dirty. You just scan the barcode with the app and get information about PFAS or other toxic chemicals it might have. However, their widespread use and long-term impact mean that most consumers are simply forced to ingest some form of PFAS, even if they try to avoid them. Research in the UK in 2024 found PFAS were present in 95% of strawberries, while a 2025 study of breakfast products, sweets, pasta, baked goods and flour from across Europe found that around four in five had a hormone-disrupting form of PFAS. The following information is not intended for publication dpa/tmn luk yyzz n1 nam sw

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

London (PA Media/dpa) – A chemical found in dark chocolate could help slow down ageing, researchers suggest. The study looked at levels of theobromine – a compound found in cacao plants – in the blood and compared them with markers of biological ageing, which indicates how old the body is in terms of health and function rather than years lived. While experts would not advise people to eat more chocolate, they said the findings could help unlock the everyday foods that “hold clues to healthier, longer lives”. Theobromine is a “relatively unexplored dietary phytonutrient” that has been linked to health benefits and extended lifespan, researchers said. However, there have been limited studies on its effect on humans. The analysis, carried out by experts at King’s College London, included 509 people in the TwinsUK cohort and 1,160 people from the Kora study in Germany. Researchers said they found a “significant association” between circulating levels of theobromine in the blood and slower biological ageing. Dr Ramy Saad, lead researcher at King’s College London, who is also a researcher at University College London and a doctor in clinical genetics, added: “This is a very exciting finding, and the next important questions are what is behind this association and how can we explore the interactions between dietary metabolites and our epigenome further? “This approach could lead us to important discoveries towards ageing, and beyond, in common and rare diseases.” Jordana Bell, professor of epigenomics at King’s College London, said: “Our study finds links between a key component of dark chocolate and staying younger for longer. “While we’re not saying that people should eat more dark chocolate, this research can help us understand how everyday foods may hold clues to healthier, longer lives.” Researchers also tested other molecules found in cocoa and coffee but suggest the effect is specific to theobromine. Dr Ricardo Costeira, a postdoctoral research associate at King’s College London, said: “This study identifies another molecular mechanism through which naturally occurring compounds in cocoa may support health. “While more research is needed, the findings from this study highlight the value of population-level analyses in ageing and genetics.” The team is now exploring if the effect on biological ageing is unique to theobromine, or if the compound interacts with other chemicals in dark chocolate, such as polyphenols. Polyphenols are powerful antioxidants also found in fruits, vegetables, tea, coffee and wine. The following information is not intended for publication pa dpa coh

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

Washington (dpa) – Masturbation is rarely the subject of conversation or even scientific research, particularly when involving older people, and yet it appears its popularity is increasing among those in their 60s. In a paper published by the Menopause Society in November, researchers said they found a "growing prevalence of masturbation and sex-toy use" among women in the US aged 60 and up after questioning around 3,000 of them about their sex lives. The authors say older people may be replacing intercourse with sex toys and other alternatives as penetrative sex becomes more painful and difficult because of menopause or erectile problems. The finding comes as separate research has shown that women rate masturbation among their preferred methods of managing symptoms of menopause. "By initiating conversations around sexuality in routine healthcare encounters, healthcare professionals can destigmatize the topic and provide valuable instruction on how to achieve an orgasm," said Monica Christmas, associate medical director at The Menopause Society. Christmas came to that conclusion after respondents "reported much greater use of sex toys during masturbation than during sex with a partner," with those doing so "significantly more likely to report always or almost always having an orgasm." "The most frequently used sex toys were an external vibrator or a dildo/penetrative toy," the team reported. "Given the prevalence of masturbation and sex toy use as well as their relationships to orgasm, older women could benefit from information from health care professionals on these topics," the researchers recommended in their paper. The following information is not intended for publication dpa spr coh

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

A key study on the safety of glyphosate, the cancer-causing chemical used in the pesticide Roundup, has been retracted due to serious ethical concerns. The journal accuses the authors of having ties to glyphosate manufacturer Monsanto. Berlin (dpa) – A scientific journal has formally retracted a study from 2000 that has played a central role in the debate about the safety of the pesticide glyphosate due to questions about who authored the study. The journal Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology formally retracted the paper in early December. It had been a key argument for claims by the then manufacturer Monsanto that the herbicide Roundup and its active ingredient glyphosate had no carcinogenic effects. In a statement, Bayer, which acquired Monsanto in 2018, said: "No one from Monsanto was involved as an author, and the company's relationship to the paper was properly disclosed." The study was widely regarded as groundbreaking in the debate, according to the specialist publisher Elsevier, which publishes the journal. However, it is now unclear whether the conclusion drawn – that glyphosate and Roundup are not carcinogenic – is actually correct. Concerns were raised about who wrote the study, its validity in connection with a misrepresentation of the authors' contributions and the study sponsor, and potential conflicts of interest on the authors' part, writes editor-in-chief Martin van den Berg in a statement published by the journal. There are several reasons behind the retraction, including the assessment of carcinogenicity, he wrote. The study's conclusions regarding whether glyphosate causes cancer are based exclusively on Monsanto studies that showed no tumour-inducing potential, van den Berg writes. At the time of publication, there were other long-term studies on chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity whose data were not taken into account. Lack of independence of the authors A legal dispute in the United States brought to light correspondence from Monsanto which shows that the three authors named in the study were probably not solely responsible for the content. Instead, Monsanto employees may have contributed to the study without being properly named as co-authors. Misrepresentation of contributions is another factor. The contributions, which appear to have been written by Monsanto employees as co-authors, were not explicitly mentioned as such in the acknowledgements section. "This omission suggests that the authors may have misrepresented their unique roles and the collaborative nature of the work presented," the journal's statement read. Questions about financial compensation Further correspondence with Monsanto disclosed during the litigation suggests that the three officially named authors may have received financial compensation from Monsanto for their work on the study, which was not disclosed. Editor-in-chief van den Berg wrote that he reached out to the sole surviving author of the study, Professor Gary Williams, but "we did not receive any response." The study had a significant influence on regulatory decisions regarding glyphosate and Roundup for decades, the journal's statement noted. "Given its status as a cornerstone in the assessment of glyphosate's safety, it is imperative that the integrity of this review article and its conclusions are not compromised." In light of these points, there is no longer any confidence in the results and conclusions, which makes the retraction necessary, van den Berg emphasizes. Why is this happening now? In 2017, internal emails from the chemical company Monsanto were published in a court case, revealing that company employees had been involved in the preparation of the influential study, according to an article in the journal Science on the retraction. Just a few months ago, a research duo reported in the journal Environmental Science & Policy how widely the study continues to be cited and how influential it remains. The article says that the study is among the top 0.1% of most-cited studies in glyphosate-related research. The revelations about Monsanto's covert involvement have done little to change this. What does the manufacturer say? The current owner of Monsanto, Bayer, rejected the criticism. The retracted study was purely a review article of properly submitted studies, explained company spokesman Philipp Blank in a statement in response to a query from dpa. "Glyphosate is the most extensively studied herbicide of the last 50 years." Leading regulatory authorities worldwide agree that glyphosate is safe when used properly, the company maintains. Current state of research According to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of the World Health Organization (WHO), glyphosate is considered a probable human carcinogen. Authorities such as the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the Germany's Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) see no relevant cancer risk if the rules of use are followed. The apparent contradiction is not really one: the IARC assessed the cancer risk, for example the general possibility that glyphosate causes cancer. The authorities' assessment took everyday risk into account as a factor. The EFSA considers the cancer risk to be negligible at the levels typically consumed by humans, for example, through food. What is glyphosate used for? It is a so-called total herbicide that damages almost all green plants. Glyphosate has been used since the mid-1970s, primarily under the trade name Roundup, and is now contained in numerous plant pesticides from various manufacturers. Farmers spray it on fields before sowing, for example, to destroy unwanted competing plants. The European Union has recently extended the authorization for glyphosate until the end of 2033. In some member states, including Germany, its use in home and community gardens and on land intended for public use is prohibited or severely restricted. In the US, people who had used Roundup and developed cancer have been awarded large sums in damages on several occasions in recent years. The following information is not intended for publication dpa ram/kll xxde mew coh

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

Washington (dpa) – Three decades ago, political scientist Francis Fukuyama argued that the more a country's people feel they can lean on each other, the better chance its businesses and economy have of thriving. Now, a newly published survey conducted in 25 countries suggests there is indeed at least a correlation between trust and economic prosperity. "Trust tends to be higher in the high-income countries surveyed than in the middle-income ones," reports the Pew Research Center, which carried out the polling.  Residents of Sweden, the Netherlands, Canada, Germany and Australia – the five highest scorers in the survey, countries with high gross domestic product (GDP) per capita – came out of it seemingly much more confident they can rely on each other than counterparts in less well-to-do Turkey, Kenya, Brazil, South Africa and Mexico, the five lowest-ranked. In Sweden, 83% of people said they mostly trust others, the highest percentage recorded. The lowest was in Turkey, where only 14% feel they can trust those around them. The US saw a near-even split, with 55% deeming themselves trusting and 44% not so much. "Within mostly high-income countries, we also see gaps in trust by education, income and age," Pew explained, with the better-off and those who spent longer in formal education more inclined to be trusting than those who left school earlier. Some countries have seen rising social trust in recent years, with Indonesia charting a 12 percentage point increase to 53% since Pew’s 2024 survey, leaving the giant Southeast Asian archipelago with the most trusting society outside the high-income nations surveyed. But in India, the world's most populous country, only 38% reported themselves as mostly trusting others – even if that was a seven point increase on last year. Germany and Sweden have also seen rises since the survey was last conducted in those countries in 2020, but in France the opposite proved to be the case with a drop of six percentage points recorded by Pew. The following information is not intended for publication dpa spr coh

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

London (PA Media/dpa) – Consuming a high number of energy drinks may lead to a stroke, doctors have suggested. The drinks, which contain high levels of caffeine and other ingredients, could push up blood pressure, which is known to increase the risk of stroke, they said. Doctors from the UK's Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust told of how they treated a normally fit and healthy man in his 50s for a stroke, which caused sudden weakness on his left side as well as unsteadiness and issues with swallowing and speech. An MRI scan confirmed he had suffered an ischaemic type of stroke, where small blood vessels become blocked. At the point of him being admitted to hospital, his blood pressure reading was very high at 254/150mmHg. The UK's National Health Service (NHS) advises that normal blood pressure is between 90/60mmHg and 120/80mmHg. High blood pressure is considered to be 135/85 or higher if the reading was taken at home, or 140/90mmHg or higher if the reading was taken at a pharmacy, GP surgery or clinic. Writing in the journal BMJ Case Reports, the doctors explained how the man was started on drugs in hospital to lower his blood pressure, which did work temporarily. But once back home, his blood pressure continued to rise and stayed high despite him being given extra drugs to control it. Medics questioned the man at one of his appointments and discovered he had been drinking an average of eight cans of energy drinks a day. Each drink contained 160mg caffeine per 16 fluid ounces. This added up to a daily intake of 1200-1300mg of caffeine when the recommended maximum daily intake is 400mg, the doctors wrote. Once he stopped consuming the drinks, his blood pressure returned to normal and blood pressure lowering drugs were no longer needed. In fact, just one week after stopping the drinks, his average blood pressure readings were around 120 to 130mmHg/80mmHg. “It was therefore thought to be likely that the patient’s consumption of highly potent energy drinks was, at least in part, a contributive factor to his secondary hypertension (high blood pressure) and in turn his stroke,” the doctors wrote. “As our case and discussion illustrate, it is possible that both acute and chronic intake of energy drinks may increase cardiovascular disease and stroke risk.” The doctors stressed that evidence overall is not conclusive, but research on the topic is accumulating. They suggested that increasing the” regulation of energy drink sales and advertising campaigns (which are often targeted at younger ages) could be beneficial to the future cerebrovascular and cardiovascular health of our society”. “Additionally, healthcare professionals should consider specific questioning related to energy drink consumption in young patients presenting with stroke or unexplained hypertension,” they said. In reflecting on his experience, the patient said he still had symptoms eight years later. He said: “I obviously wasn’t aware of the dangers drinking energy drinks were causing to myself, (I) have been left with numbness (in my) left hand side hand and fingers, foot and toes even after eight years.” Discussing the findings, the article said the average energy drink contains around 80mg of caffeine per 250ml, compared with 30mg in tea and 90mg in coffee, but in some cases can contain up to 500mg in a single serving. “This declared amount is the ‘pure caffeine’, but other energy drink ingredients contain ‘hidden caffeine’— for example, guarana is thought to contain caffeine at twice the concentration of a coffee bean. “The hypothesis is that the interaction of these other ingredients, including taurine, guarana, ginseng and glucuronolactone, potentiates the effects of caffeine heightening stroke cardiovascular disease risk through numerous mechanisms”. These include raising blood pressure. A spokesman for the industry-funded British Soft Drinks Association said: “The European Food Safety Authority confirms the safety of energy drinks ingredients and therefore does not provide any scientific justification to treat energy drinks differently than the main contributors to daily caffeine intake in all age groups, i.e. tea, coffee, chocolate and other non-alcoholic beverages. “Food regulations dictate that drinks with an added caffeine content of more than 150 mg/litre must include the following: ‘High caffeine content. Not recommended for children or pregnant or breast-feeding women’ followed by a quantitative indication of the product’s caffeine content. This approach has been adopted universally across the EU and UK.” The following information is not intended for publication pa dpa coh

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)