Independent and combined associations of urinary metals exposure with markers of liver injury: Results from the NHANES 2013-2016.

BACKGROUND: Heavy metals entering the human body could cause damage to a variety of organs. However, the combined harmful effects of exposure to various metals on liver function are not well understood. The purpose of the study was to investigate the independent and joint relationships between heavy metal exposure and liver function in adults. METHODS: The study involved 3589 adults from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Concentrations of urinary metals, including arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), lead (Pb), antimony (Sb), barium (Ba), thallium (Tl), tungsten (W), uranium (U), were determined in urine using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Data for liver function biomarkers included alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), gamma-glutamyl transaminase (GGT), and alkaline phosphatase (ALP). Survey-weighted linear regression and quantile g-computation (qgcomp) were employed to evaluate the relationship of urinary metals with the markers of liver injury. RESULTS: Cd, U and Ba were found to have positive correlations with ALT, AST, GGT, and ALP in the survey-weighted linear regression analyses. According to the qgcomp analyses, the total metal mixture was positively correlated with ALT (percent change: 8.15; 95% CI: 3.84, 12.64), AST (percent change: 5.55; 95% CI: 2.39, 8.82), GGT (percent change: 14.30; 95% CI: 7.81, 21.18), and ALP (percent change: 5.59; 95% CI: 2.65, 8.62), and Cd, U, and Ba were the main contributors to the combined effects. Positive joint effects were observed between Cd and U on ALT, AST, GGT and ALP, and U and Ba had positive joint effects on ALT, AST and GGT. CONCLUSION: Exposures to Cd, U, and Ba were individually associated with multiple markers of liver injury. Mixed metal exposure might be adversely correlated with markers of liver function. The findings indicated the potential harmful effect of metal exposure on liver function.

Probiotic Supplements: Hope or Hype?

Probiotic bacteria have been associated with various health benefits and included in overwhelming number of foods. Today, probiotic supplements are consumed with increasing regularity and record a rapidly growing economic value. With billions of heterogeneous populations of probiotics per serving, probiotic supplements contain the largest quantity of probiotics across all functional foods. They often carry antibiotic-resistant determinants that can be transferred to and accumulate in resident bacteria of the gastrointestinal tract and risk their acquisitions by opportunistic pathogens. While the health benefits of probiotics have been widely publicized, this health risk, however, is underrepresented in both scientific studies and public awareness. On the other hand, the human gut presents conditions that are unfavorable for bacteria, including probiotics. It remains uncertain if probiotics from supplements can tolerate acids and bile salts that may undermine their effectiveness in conferring health benefits. Here, we put into perspective the perceived health benefits and the long-term safety of consuming probiotic supplements, specifically bringing intolerance to acids and bile salts, and the long-standing issue of antibiotic-resistant gene transfer into sharp focus. We report that probiotics from supplements examined in this study have poor tolerance to acids and bile salts while also displaying resistance to multiple antibiotics. They could also adapt and gain resistance to streptomycin in vitro. In an environment where consuming supplements is considered a norm, our results and that of others will put in perspective the persisting concerns surrounding probiotic supplements so that the current hype does not overpower the hope.