The current review aims to systematically assess the evidence related to human health outcomes when an organic diet is consumed in comparison to its conventional counterpart. Relevant databases were searched for articles published to January 2019. Clinical trials and observational research studies were included where they provided comparative results on direct or indirect health outcomes. Thirty-five papers met the criteria for inclusion in the review. Few clinical trials assessed direct improvements in health outcomes associated with organic food consumption; most assessed either differences in pesticide exposure or other indirect measures. Significant positive outcomes were seen in longitudinal studies where increased organic intake was associated with reduced incidence of infertility, birth defects, allergic sensitisation, otitis media, pre-eclampsia, metabolic syndrome, high BMI, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The current evidence base does not allow a definitive statement on the health benefits of organic dietary intake. However, a growing number of important findings are being reported from observational research linking demonstrable health benefits with organic food consumption. Future clinical research should focus on using long-term whole-diet substitution with certified organic interventions as this approach is more likely to determine whether or not true measurable health benefits exist.

Objective To evaluate the benefits and risks of zinc formulations compared with controls for prevention or treatment of acute viral respiratory tract infections (RTIs) in adults. Method Seventeen English and Chinese databases were searched in April/May 2020 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and from April/May 2020 to August 2020 for SARS-CoV-2 RCTs. Cochrane rapid review methods were applied. Quality appraisals used the Risk of Bias 2.0 and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results Twenty-eight RCTs with 5446 participants were identified. None were specific to SARS-CoV-2. Compared with placebo, oral or intranasal zinc prevented 5 RTIs per 100 person-months (95% CI 1 to 8, numbers needed to treat (NNT)=20, moderate-certainty/quality). Sublingual zinc did not prevent clinical colds following human rhinovirus inoculations (relative risk, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.21, moderate-certainty/quality). On average, symptoms resolved 2 days earlier with sublingual or intranasal zinc compared with placebo (95% CI 0.61 to 3.50, very low-certainty/quality) and 19 more adults per 100 were likely to remain symptomatic on day 7 without zinc (95% CI 2 to 38, NNT=5, low-certainty/quality). There were clinically significant reductions in day 3 symptom severity scores (mean difference, MD −1.20 points, 95% CI −0.66 to −1.74, low-certainty/quality), but not average daily symptom severity scores (standardised MD −0.15, 95% CI −0.43 to 0.13, low-certainty/quality). Non-serious adverse events (AEs) (eg, nausea, mouth/nasal irritation) were higher (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.69, NNHarm=7, moderate-certainty/quality). Compared with active controls, there were no differences in illness duration or AEs (low-certainty/quality). No serious AEs were reported in the 25 RCTs that monitored them (low-certainty/quality). Conclusions In adult populations unlikely to be zinc deficient, there was some evidence suggesting zinc might prevent RTIs symptoms and shorten duration. Non-serious AEs may limit tolerability for some. The comparative efficacy/effectiveness of different zinc formulations and doses were unclear. The GRADE-certainty/quality of the evidence was limited by a high risk of bias, small sample sizes and/or heterogeneity. Further research, including SARS-CoV-2 clinical trials is warranted. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020182044.

Chronic Non Specific Low Back Pain (CNSLBP) is a common, complex and disabling condition that has been present for longer than three months and is not caused by a serious pathology. Osteopaths are health practitioners who commonly diagnose and treat CNSLBP patients using a complex set of interventions that includes manual therapy. The study aimed to complete a Systematic Review of clinical research into osteopathic intervention in CNSLBP using a rigorous assessment of study quality.

Objective: To summarize the current state of the research evidence for whole-system, multi-modality naturopathic medicine. Design: A systematic search for research articles from around the world was undertaken using MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, and WHO regional indexes. Naturopathic journals and gray literature were hand searched. No language restrictions were imposed. Interventions: All human research evaluating the effectiveness of naturopathic medicine, where two or more naturopathic modalities are delivered by naturopathic clinicians, were included in the review. Case studies of five or more cases were included. Results: Thirty-three published studies (n = 9859) met inclusion criteria (11 American; 4 Canadian; 6 German; 7 Indian; 3 Australian; 1 United Kingdom; and 1 Japanese) across a range of mainly chronic clinical conditions. The studies predominantly showed evidence for the efficacy of naturopathic medicine for the conditions and settings in which they were based. Conclusions: To date, research in whole-system, multi-modality naturopathic medicine shows that it is effective for treating cardiovascular disease, musculoskeletal pain, type 2 diabetes, polycystic ovary syndrome, depression, anxiety, and a range of complex chronic conditions.

Coeliac disease is an autoimmune disorder resulting from an interaction between diet, genome and immunity. The treatment of CoeD is lifelong adherence to a gluten free diet, which is associated with clinical and histological improvements. However, a substantive number of individuals report only partial symptom improvement despite both compliance with a strict gluten free diet and improvements in serological and histological biomarkers of disease activity. The role of the intestinal microbiota is an area of interest in this sub-group. To investigate the role of yeasts and parasites in individuals reporting persistent symptoms of Coeliac disease (CoeD). Forty-five people who met the ESPGHAN diagnostic criteria for CoeD were recruited via the Australian Coeliac Association. The faecal measures of the DNA of yeasts and parasites from the CoeD group were compared to data obtained from the medical records of non-coeliac controls with gastrointestinal symptoms from other causes. Candida sp. was detected in 33% of the CoeD group compared 0% of the control group (p = 0.000) and Saccharomyces sp. was detected in 33% of the CoeD group compared to 10% of the control group (p = 0.026). There were no differences in the presence of any of the parasite species measured. Further research is required to understand the significance of Candida and Saccharomyces species in both the aetiology of CoeD and of persistent symptoms in this sub-group. Trial Registration Clinical Trial Registration—ANZCTR Number: 12610000630011

The measurement of hydrogen–methane breath gases is widely used in gastroenterology to evaluate malabsorption syndromes and bacterial overgrowth. Laboratories offering breath testing provide variable guidance regarding oral hygiene practices prior to testing. Given that oral dysbiosis has the potential to cause changes in breath gases, it raises concerns that oral hygiene is not a standard inclusion in current breath testing guidelines. The aim of this study was to determine how a pre-test mouthwash may impact hydrogen–methane breath test results. Participants presenting for breath testing who had elevated baseline gases were given a chlorhexidine mouthwash. If a substantial reduction in expired hydrogen or methane occurred after the mouthwash, breath samples were collected before and after a mouthwash at all breath sample collection points for the duration of testing. Data were evaluated to determine how the mouthwash might influence test results and diagnostic status. In 388 consecutive hydrogen–methane breath tests, modifiable elevations occurred in 24.7%. Administration of a chlorhexidine mouthwash resulted in significantly (p ≤ 0.05) reduced breath hydrogen in 67% and/or methane gas in 93% of those consenting to inclusion. In some cases, this modified the diagnosis. Mean total gas concentrations pre- and post-mouthwash were 221.0 ppm and 152.1 ppm (p < 0.0001) for hydrogen, and 368.9 ppm and 249.8 ppm (p < 0.0001) for methane. Data suggest that a single mouthwash at baseline has a high probability of returning a false positive diagnosis. Variations in gas production due to oral hygiene practices has significant impacts on test interpretation and the subsequent diagnosis. The role of oral dysbiosis in causing gastrointestinal symptoms also demands exploration as it may be an underlying factor in the presenting condition that was the basis for the referral.