The move by experts advising U.S. watchdogs will clear the way for the first GM creature to be sold as food.

The first GM salmon could be on American dinner tables within two to three years, and possibly on British plates soon after that, paving the way for the genetic modification of other fish and food animals into what critics are calling ‘Frankenfood’.

Shares in the company behind the technology leapt by 26 per cent on the London Stock Exchange on Friday, providing evidence that analysts see GM as the future of fish production.

However, the science is highly controversial and consumers will have questions about the impact on human health and the environment.

Critics of GM food fear the technology leads to the creation of mutant misshapen fish and could harm wild fish populations if they escape.

Research on GM trout in Canada found that while they grew faster and were much bigger, a number developed misshapen heads and bloated bodies.

More…

* The carrot that might take you to infinity and beyond… Buzz Lightyear-shaped vegetable amazes gardener

The firm behind the GM Atlantic Salmon, Aqua Bounty, says its fish are normal but for the fact they grow up to three times more quickly.

As a result, the AquAdvantage Salmon reach a market weight of around 3kg (6.6lb) in 16-18 months instead of the three years for farmed fish. In theory, they would reach around 6kg after three years, which would be double the size of most natural salmon of the same age.

The growth is speeded up by the insertion of two genes, one linked to the production of growth hormone and a second to ensure growth continues even in very cold temperatures.

The technology allows fish farmers to produce many more salmon at much lower cost, so boosting output and profits.

The scientists behind the salmon have created safeguards to prevent any danger of them escaping and breeding with the wild population. These include ensuring all the fish involved are female and sterile.

Now, two expert reports commissioned by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration have concluded it is safe for GM salmon to go into production.

On health, the scientists on the Veterinary Medicines Advisory Committee said there are ‘no material differences’ between GM and conventional salmon. They say the fish contains the expected amounts of nutritionally important omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids.

They concluded: ‘Food from AquAdvantage Salmon is as safe to eat as food from other Atlantic salmon.’ And they added ‘there is a reasonable certainty of no harm from consumption’.

However, they admitted there are gaps in the research looking at whether some types of GM fish – not those currently planned for dinner tables – might cause an allergic reaction.

On the environment, a second team of scientists concluded the safeguards put in place by Aqua Bounty would be sufficient to allow production to go ahead.

Initially, the eggs would be produced in Canada, then shipped to Panama to be grown and then killed. Over time the technology would be extended worldwide.

The FDA is due to make a final decision this month on whether to approve the GM salmon.

But a coalition of 31 U.S. consumer, animal welfare, environmental and fisheries groups is opposing approval.

They claim tests used to show the safety of the GM salmon were based on very small samples and point out that some of the fish had higher levels of growth hormone in their bloodstream, which is claimed to create a cancer risk.

While the GM fish are supposed to be sterile, critics said up to 5 per cent might be able to conceive and breed if they got into the wild.

Pete Riley, director of campaign group GM Freeze, said: ‘We are extremely concerned about the potential for these fish to escape.’

For years I haven’t been able to eat a sandwich without smearing the bread with my secret guilty pleasure: a big dollop of that smooth yellow gunk that comes in giant jars.

I tell myself it’s OK because I buy the brand labelled ‘lite’ (ha, ha), but deep down I know this stuff is edible crack.

Giving it up is taking massive will-power, even for a woman of steel like me; and who has the time to sit around whisking up the real stuff with egg yolks and virgin olive oil?

Now, my addiction has been identified by scientists in the U.S. who claim junk food containing high levels of fat, sugar and salt can trigger the same cravings as Class A drugs.

Our brains produce a feeling of pleasure after that first hit of nutritionally dubious rubbish – and then it takes more and more of the stuff to repeat that initial high. I don’t find this shocking, just predictable.

After all, the whole point of manufacturing foodstuffs in bulk is to shift as much of it as possible and deliver maximum profit to investors.

It never was about social engineering or health, just about balance sheets. Instead of agonising about pizzas, mayo, milkshakes and ready meals, shouldn’t we be more worried about another of our dietary addictions?

Never mind fast food, what about our love affair with meat? People in countries such as China, who once ate rice and fish-based diets, are demanding meat protein, and prices have sky-rocketed as demand exceeds supply.

In this country, they’ve risen by 25 per cent in three years and lamb prices are at their highest level for 27 years.

In developing countries such as India, Indonesia and China, switching to meat is seen as a sign of affluence.

Meat occupies such a central place in the British diet, we’re not buying less, but just switching to the cheaper cuts.

Mince now accounts for more than half of all meat sold in the UK. Instead of chops, we’re making burgers, spaghetti bolognaise and shepherd’s pie.

Meat is still promoted to a ludicrous degree by all the top chefs, as if our lives would be drab without it.

They seem to be implying it’s just not British to eat less of the stuff.

Browse through last weekend’s colour supplements, and chefs such as Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall are dishing up recipes for whole shoulders of pork weighing at least 2.5kg.

Although I admire his campaigns against factory farming, I wonder how many mums can afford a giant piece of meat this size, and how many families will sit down once a week to eat a meal for eight?

He’s come up with pork salads and pork with tuna sauce to deal with the leftovers, but isn’t that just signing up to a daily diet of meat, meat and more meat?

Hugh claims to care about the environment, but it takes 2.5kg of animal feed to produce every kilo of pork. It takes 6kg of feed to produce every kilo of beef – even when it is turned into mince.

And there’s the heating and transportation costs involved, and poor grain harvests in Russia have seen the cost of animal feed rise dramatically in recent months.

Meat is not going to get cheaper. Isn’t this an opportunity to make beef, pork and lamb a treat rather than an everyday staple?

Loopholes in our food labelling legislation mean that pies and pasties labelled as British can contain meat from countries where standards of health and hygiene are nowhere near as high as our own.

Is our need for a meat fix so bad that we’re willing to eat beef that’s travelled thousands of miles? You’re only issued with one body from birth to the grave, so why treat it like a dumping ground for cheap fuel full of dubious additives?

You’re not seriously going to tell me eating animals that have been given chemical-enhanced, growth-promoting feed will actually improve your health?

We need to eat less meat, and support our farmers who rear it ethically in decent conditions. Don’t moan about what it costs – just treat it as the luxury it deserves to be.

Although gum disease has long been suspected of causing heart problems, scientists have long been puzzled as to how this happens.

Now researchers from the University of Bristol say that a self-defense mechanism of microbes in the mouth are to blame.

When the bacteria enters the blood stream through bleeding gums they deploy a protein that forces platelets to bind together and shield the bugs with clots.

Study leader Professor Howard Jenkinson, said: ‘When the platelets clump together they completely encase the bacteria.

‘This provides a protective cover not only from the immune system, but also from antibiotics that might be used to treat infection.

‘Unfortunately, as well as helping out the bacteria, platelet clumping can cause small blood clots, growths on the heart valves, or inflammation of blood vessels that can block the blood supply to the heart and brain.’

Speaking at the Society for General Microbiology’s autumn meeting in Nottingham, Prof Jenkinson said oral bacteria can ‘wreak havoc’ if not kept in check by regular brushing and flossing.

‘Poor dental hygiene can lead to bleeding gums, providing bacteria with an escape route into the bloodstream, where they can initiate blood clots leading to heart disease,’ he said.

The Streptococcus bacteria normally live in confined communities in the mouth called biofilms. It is these that are responsible for dental plaque and gum disease.

The bugs become far more potentially harmful once they break free of the mouth and enter the blood circulation.

‘People need to be aware that as well as keeping a check on their diet, blood pressure, cholesterol and fitness levels, they also need to maintain good dental hygiene to minimise their risk of heart problems,’ said Prof Jenkinson.

The team is using a new blood flow model developed by the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland that mimics conditions in the human circulatory system.

The scientists are investigating how the platelet-activating behaviour of Streptococcus bacteria can be blocked.

‘This could eventually lead to new treatments for cardiovascular disease, which is the biggest killer in the developed world,’ said Prof Jenkinson.

Traces of the metal in milk from some of the UK’s leading products were found to be much higher than is legally allowed in water, according to scientists.

One formula made by Cow & Gate – specifically marketed for premature babies – had the highest level of all, with more than 800 micrograms per litre.

European law states water can contain no more than 200 micrograms of aluminium per litre. Chemist Dr Chris Exley, who led the study at Keele University, Staffordshire, said: ‘We’ve known about the high aluminium content in infant formula for many years and there is evidence to show it is potentially quite dangerous.

‘It has been linked to neurological diseases and bone defects in later life and there are even links with dementia.

‘Everyone has aluminium in their bodies but infants are especially prone to absorbing it and are not so good at getting rid of it.’

But he stressed: ‘It is not the case that a child is not going to drop down dead if they drink it.’ Manufacturers say they do not add aluminium to their products, but many formulas are often packaged in aluminium foil.

It also occurs naturally in soya plants due to the acidic soil they are grown in, so experts advise soya milk formulas should be used only on the advice of a GP.

The Food Standards Agency does not provide a ’safe’ limit for aluminium in formula milk, but Dr Exley wants manufacturers to lower the level dramatically or print it on the label so parents have an informed choice.

Dr Exley, whose team tested 16 of the UK’s leading formula milk brands for children up to the age of one, said: ‘It is concerning, especially when the product with the highest level of aluminium we found was aimed at premature babies, who are likely to be the most vulnerable of all. It is really shocking.

‘Millions of parents have no choice but to feed their children this milk. I would advise if they are using ready-made milk to switch to powder as it contains lower levels.’

The research is published in the journal BMC Pediatrics.

In July, the GMTV weather girl was pictured in an unflattering skimpy ensemble, wrestling with her skipping rope.

Just five weeks later it emerged that the 40-year-old, whose daughter was born in
November, had already lost a stone.

And if the two-hour, outdoor training session she undertook on Wednesday was anything to go by, such rapid weight-loss certainly hasn’t been a walk in the park.

Miss Nasir’s workout with a trainer near her home in central London began with a six-mile run, followed by a gruelling session of kickboxing.

As if that wasn’t exhausting enough, the female trainer then made her lift weighted exercise balls and spend 15 minutes completing a series of jumps using a bench for support. She followed that with a round of pushups and stomach-strengthening exercises on an inflatable balance ball.

The 5ft weather girl, who told how she once ballooned to a 12st size 16, was tipping the scales at 10st 4lb in July.

But three such training sessions each week, combined with a low-calorie diet has helped her reduce that to just over 9st.

There’ll be further rewards too. Although she once claimed she hadn’t exercised for three years, Miss Nasir will be releasing an exercise DVD when she leaves her GMTV role next week, when the show relaunches as Daybreak.

A major study shows those taking bisphosphonate drugs for five years – the recommended duration to improve bone strength – are at highest risk, but any level of use was linked to excess risk.

Around 1.4 million British women are eligible for treatment because of osteoporosis, but a quarter do not respond or suffer crippling stomach side-effects.

To avoid them, patients have to take their pills on an empty stomach and stay upright for 30 minutes before eating and drinking.

It is thought gastric reflux, where stomach acid flows back up the food pipe, may cause precancerous changes.

Experts claim women who suffer stomach problems could be swapped to other drugs, but under NHS guidelines their bones have to become thinner before they are allowed more expensive medication.

Researchers from the University of Oxford’s cancer epidemiology unit and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) looked at the use of oral bisphosphonates, including Fosamax, and three types of cancer, says a report published online in the British Medical Journal.

For those taking the drugs for at least three years – five years on average – the risk was more than double compared with those who had never taken them.

Typically, oesophageal cancer develops in one per 1,000 people aged 60 to 79 over five years. Five years’ use of the drugs would push this up to two cases per 1,000.
There were no links between the drugs and stomach or bowel cancer.

Their study also sheds light on why children born to women in their late 30s and early 40s are at greater risk of Down’s Syndrome and other genetic conditions.

The team of British researchers found that as a woman gets older levels of a crucial protein that helps eggs prepare for the moment of fertilisation decline sharply.

The drop increases the risk that an egg will end up with the wrong number of chromosomes and be faulty.

The finding raises the prospect of new drugs to help keep eggs healthy as women get older.

Researchers have long known that these eggs deteriorate over time and that babies born to women in their late 30s and early 40s are at greater risk of genetic disorders.

However, the reason why the eggs of older women are less healthy has been unclear.

Girls are born with a set of immature egg cells that will last for their entire reproductive life.

Each immature egg contains two sets of 23 chromosomes – the chains of DNA that contain instructions on how to build and maintain a human being.

Before the eggs can be fertilised, they must complete a complex process of ‘ripening’ called meiosis in which half of these chromosomes are ejected.

The resulting egg cell contains only 23 strands of DNA – the genes passed down from a mother to her child.

The most important stage of meiosis happens just before ovulation when a large amount of DNA is ejected from the egg. If it goes wrong, an egg can be left with the wrong number of chromosomes.

In the study, published in the journal Current Biology, researchers at Newcastle University and Newcastle Fertility Centre looked at a naturally occurring protein called cohesin, which holds chromosomes together in the egg ready for the ejection of the unwanted DNA.

They used eggs from young and old mice to show that cohesin levels decline gradually as females get older. If cohesin levels are too low, too many or too few chromosomes can be ejected.

Eggs that are defective in this way may fail to develop resulting in infertility, or they may lead to a pregnancy with a high risk of miscarriage, or to the birth of a Down’s Syndrome baby.

Study leader Dr Mary Herbert, a reader in reproductive biology at the university’s Institute for Ageing and Health, said: ‘Reproductive fitness in women declines dramatically from the mid-30s onwards.

‘Our findings point to cohesin being a major culprit in this. The aged mice we used are equivalent to a woman in her early-40s.

‘Cohesin levels were very much reduced in eggs from older mice and the chromosomes underwent a very messy division resulting in the wrong number of chromosomes being retained in the egg.’

She said further research would be carried out to see why cohesin was lost with age.

‘If we can understand this, we will be in a better position to know if there is any possibility of developing interventions to help reduce cohesin loss,’ she said.

‘Undoubtedly, the best way for women to avoid this problem is to have their children earlier.’

A woman’s chances of having a baby naturally drop markedly after the age of 35. Doctors say the ‘optimum age’ for childbearing is between 20 and 35 for mother and baby.

The chances of Down’s syndrome – which is caused by the presence of an extra chromosome in an egg – and other chromosomal abnormalities rise sharply at the age of 37.

Evidence suggests that adults who keep their brains active by reading, listening to the radio or doing puzzles, can delay the onset of dementia. But these people may then decline more quickly when they do eventually exhibit symptoms.

Dr Robert Wilson, from Rush University Medical Centre in Chicago, said: ‘Our results suggest that the benefit of delaying the initial signs of cognitive decline may come at the cost of more rapid dementia progression later on, but the question is: Why does this happen?’

Mentally stimulating activities may help the brain ‘rewire’ itself to circumvent the effects of dementia, said Dr Wilson.

However, once the disease is diagnosed, damage to the brain is likely to be greater than it would be in someone who was not mentally stimulated.

Mental activity appeared to delay the start of Alzheimer’s and then speed up its progress, while reducing the overall amount of time a person suffers from the disease.

The 12-year-study, published online in the journal Neurology, involved evaluating the mental activity of 1,157 people aged 65 and over, none of whom had dementia at the start.

Mental decline was measured for each point on a “cognitive activity scale” which reflected how much brain stimulation participants had.

Over a period of six years, the rate of decline was reduced by 52 per cent for each scale point in those without cognitive impairment. For individuals diagnosed Alzheimer’s, the average rate of decline per year increased by 42 per cent for each point on the cognitive activity scale.

Dr Susanne Sorensen, head of research at the Alzheimer’s Society, said: ‘The jury is still out on whether pouring over a crossword or enjoying a good book could keep your brain ticking over for longer.

‘This robust study adds considerable weight to the argument that, at least in later life, it could and it may even delay the symptoms of dementia.

‘However although the symptoms are delayed, there is no evidence changes in the brain associated with dementia have been reduced.

‘That the brain is allowed to deteriorate to a larger degree before symptoms like memory loss become apparent could explain why the condition seems to progress more quickly after diagnosis.

‘More research is now needed to establish why this happens and what role mental stimulation may have in keeping people functioning for longer.’

Around 750,000 people in the UK suffer from some form of dementia and more than half have Alzheimer’s disease.

Those considered at ‘high-risk’ of developing a form of the disorder were far more likely to become fixated with a non-social toy when left to their own devices.

Autism is a lifelong developmental disability and part of a spectrum disorder. The main symptoms are difficulties with social interaction, impaired communication skills and unusual thought and behaviour patterns.

Autism is thought to affect one in 100 children in England and those with autistic siblings are 25 times times more likely to develop the condition than those with no family history of autism.

Researchers at the Kennedy Krieger institute and University of Delaware studied 25 six-month-old infants in this ‘high-risk’ group along with 25 of their peers.

The youngsters were placed in a chair with a simple joystick. When they moved it the musical toy was activated and they were given more attention by their caregiver. When actively engaged the children in both groups spent a similar amount of time looking at the person as they did at the toy.

However, the team found that when the babies were not being engaged, those in the high risk group spent far more time gazing at the toy than the caregiver.

Study author Dr Rebecca Landa, said the study showed a subtle early marker for autism.

‘This study shows that there is a particular vulnerability in high-risk siblings at six months of age,’ she said.

‘They are not as socially interactive and engaged on their own as their peers, but still respond typically when engaged by their caregivers, making for a subtle difference that could be easily overlooked by both parents and some professionals.’

The study suggests that like older children, infants at high risk of autism may benefit from frequent exposure to simple cause and effect lessons to aid their development.

‘Babies in both groups of the study learned the multi-stimuli task to the same degree,’ Dr Landa said.

‘The high-risk siblings still have the capacity to learn cause and effect as well as their low-risk peers at this young age.’

Dr Gina Gomez de la Cuesta, Action Research Leader at The National Autistic Society was cautiously optimistic about the findings.

She told the Mail Online: ‘There has been a lot of research which examines a child’s level of joint attention or eye gazing patterns and the potential links to autism.

‘This study of siblings is interesting as it shows more problems in initiating joint attention with others than responding to joint attention.

‘However, until the children reach an age where diagnosis is possible, it is difficult to say how accurately these behaviours can be used to predict a diagnosis of autism.’

The cost of private medical insurance has shot up by 14% this year as insurers face spiralling costs for cancer drugs such as Avastin, which patients cannot get through the NHS.

Insurers have been forced to step in because many of these drugs have been turned down by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) – whose job it is to decide whether the NHS can afford to pay for certain types of treatment.

For the best policies, the price hike means premiums have leapt by between £100 to £330 a year.

Bupa spends £12 million a year on Avastin. On top of this, insurers are also paying for a range of other expensive cancer drugs which have been developed in the past few years.

Typically, insurers pay only for ‘acute’ conditions which are considered curable, rather than ‘chronic’ illnesses which are long-term and never cured. For instance, a heart attack is treated as acute while asthma or diabetes are chronic.

But these ‘miracle’ cancer drugs muddy the waters between these definitions and all the major insurers have told Money Mail they will pay for Avastin even if Nice finally bans it. Unlike the NHS, which is guided by decisions made by NICE, private healthcare will pay for new drugs provided they are licensed and recommended by your doctor for the condition being treated.

Managing director Mike Izzard, of specialist broker Premier Choice Health, says: ‘The trouble is health insurance policies are often woolly and unclear about their stance on cancer.

Customers can’t be sure if they’ll be covered or not, which is deeply unsatisfactory.’ Although all the major providers say they will pay for Avastin, there are often limits within the policies over how long or how much they will pay.

Avastin, which attacks tumours of the bowel, costs £20,800 for a ten-month course (the average length of time most sufferers need the treatment). It is also used to treat other cancers. Health insurers often offer a range of products – the more comprehensive the cover, the more expensive they are.

French-owned Axa PPP, which originally refused to cover breast cancer drug Herceptin, has a cheaper plan which pays for treatment for only 12 months.

Other plans cover 36 months of treatment and premier policies provide benefit for drugs recommended by the patient’s oncologist — whether those drugs are licensed or not. Aviva’s policies cover you for only 12 months’ treatment of each condition.

Alan Lakey, of independent adviser Highclere Financial, says: ‘With cancer cover, you need to ask whether your insurer will pay for all the cancer drugs available.

‘There are real limitations. These policies are not intended for long-term treatment, so they will treat you for the initial disease, but might not cover you for follow-up treatment.’

Only WPA offers cancer cover as an optional extra on its NHS top-up policy, Wellness, costing £15 a month. For an extra £4.20 a month for a non-smoker (£10 for a smoker), you can buy access to expensive, advanced cancer drugs not available on the NHS up to a limit of £50,000.

WPA’s cancer add-on is available only up to the age of 65 and if there’s no history of cancer in your immediate family before the age of 60.

But under its Flexible Health policy, you are covered for licensed cancer drugs if your consultant says they have ‘curative intent’.

After 12 months, WPA checks they are still prescribed on this basis. If so, it continues to pay for another 12 months.

Chief Executive Julian Stainton says: ‘All that means is your oncologist believes it will work and do some good. We have dozens of clients on Avastin.’ Bupa has a heart and cancer policy — the top two health worries — which covers all stages of cancer. Provided a drug is licensed for use in the UK for the condition being treated, Bupa will routinely fund it.

Both Bupa and PruHealth say they don’t impose cost or time limits on cancer treatment in their policies. And Exeter Friendly Society, a mutual, has Health Cover For Me, which promises to give unlimited cover for all stages of cancer as well as other conditions covered in the policy.

It will pay for all licensed drugs without any time or cost limitations.

‘I lived to see my daughter married’

Life-prolonging cancer drugs such as Avastin have allowed former Army captain Johnny Mann to walk his daughter down the aisle and watch his grandchildren grow up.

Five years ago, Mr Mann, 59, was given just six months to live after he was diagnosed with lung cancer.

WPA’s Flexible Health insurance policy paid for him to have Avastin for 18 months as well as other advanced drugs. In all, he estimates he’s had £100,000 worth of treatment.

Mr Mann, a father of four from South Kelsey, in Lincolnshire, says: ‘Health insurance puts you in control and gives you hope. When someone gives you the awful news you’ve only a few months to live, you are longing for someone to help you and that’s what WPA did for me.

‘You don’t realise how precious time is until you are threatened. It’s so unfair on people who can’t get access to these drugs.’

Since his diagnosis, Mr Mann has seen his grandsons Connor, five, and Jake, three, grow up, and was able to walk his daughter Claire, above, down the aisle when she married in September.

He and his wife Linda, 52, have also achieved their lifetime dream of buying a yacht.