This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of LB, TPL either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

A large study led by Stanford Medicine researchers has found that women who used estrogen-only menopausal hormone therapy showed significantly less brain evidence of Alzheimer’s disease at autopsy, along with lower odds of receiving a dementia diagnosis during their lifetimes, offering new pathological evidence in a research area that has produced conflicting findings for decades.

The study, published August 12 in Neurology, the medical journal of the American Academy of Neurology, analyzed data from 21,462 women, drawing on two existing research datasets: the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center’s autopsy cohort and the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative’s living cohort. Within that population, researchers compared 258 women who reported using estrogen-only hormone therapy against roughly 2,701 women who reported no hormone therapy use.

Women who had used estrogen-only therapy showed 35% lower odds of Alzheimer’s disease pathology in their autopsied brain tissue and 39% lower odds of having ever received a clinical dementia diagnosis, according to the study’s findings. Researchers examined brain tissue directly for amyloid plaques, neurofibrillary tangles and amyloid-plaque density, three hallmark physical changes associated with Alzheimer’s disease, rather than relying solely on cognitive test scores or clinical symptom assessments used in many earlier studies on the topic.

Jennifer Bruno, the study’s lead author and an instructor in psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Stanford, said the direct examination of brain tissue set the research apart from prior work in the field. “Women who had used estrogen-only hormone therapy had 35% lower odds,” Bruno said, describing the reduced presence of the disease’s defining brain changes compared with women who had not used the therapy.

Because estrogen-only hormone therapy is generally prescribed to women who have undergone a hysterectomy, given that estrogen alone can raise the risk of endometrial cancer in women who still have a uterus, most participants in the estrogen-only group likely fell into that category, according to the study’s authors, though the datasets used did not include confirmed hysterectomy records.

Senior author Hadi Hosseini, an associate professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Stanford, said examining actual brain tissue offered a more definitive picture than symptom-based measures alone. “By looking where the actual damage is done, the brain, you can see where the Alzheimer’s-associated defining features are,” Hosseini said, describing the approach as a way to more directly locate and quantify disease-related changes rather than inferring them indirectly.

The findings arrive in an area of medical research that has produced notably inconsistent results over the years. Earlier studies, including large trials from the Women’s Health Initiative, had previously linked menopausal hormone therapy, particularly combined estrogen-progesterone regimens, to an increased risk of dementia, guidance that shaped clinical recommendations discouraging hormone therapy use specifically for memory-related concerns. The new findings run counter to that established guidance, at least with respect to estrogen-only regimens.

Researchers cautioned that the study’s observational design means it can demonstrate an association between estrogen-only therapy and reduced Alzheimer’s pathology, but cannot prove that the therapy directly causes that reduction. Hosseini told Fox News Digital that other factors could help explain the pattern, noting it remains possible that women who used hormone therapy differed from non-users in ways researchers could not fully measure, including overall baseline health or general engagement with the health care system.

Timing also complicates how directly the findings apply to women considering hormone therapy today. Participants in the study who used hormone therapy generally began treatment around age 70, according to reporting on the study, whereas current clinical practice typically involves starting therapy in the late 40s or early 50s and discontinuing it before age 60. Because more recent research suggests menopausal hormone therapy may offer greater benefits when started during or shortly after menopause, researchers said the study’s findings, based on a group that started therapy considerably later in life, may actually understate the potential benefit of earlier initiation.

Alzheimer’s disease remains the leading cause of dementia among older adults, with women accounting for roughly two-thirds of all diagnoses. Some research has pointed to the sharp decline in estrogen levels during menopause as a possible contributing factor to increased Alzheimer’s risk among women, a hypothesis the new findings offer additional, though still preliminary, support for.

Despite the notable findings, the study’s authors were clear that the results should not be interpreted as a basis for changing current medical guidance. Bruno said the findings represent meaningful, first-of-their-kind pathological evidence in a genuinely contested area of research, but stressed they serve as a signal calling for further study rather than a reason for women to start or stop hormone therapy specifically for brain health. Both Bruno and Hosseini said the field now needs prospective, biomarker-based clinical trials following women before, during and after menopause to determine more conclusively whether menopausal hormone therapy offers a genuine protective effect against Alzheimer’s disease.

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health. Researchers said the findings underscore the continued need for well-designed clinical trials capable of establishing a clearer, causal relationship between hormone therapy and long-term brain health outcomes in women.

This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of EUV, SOXX, SOXL either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

A new report has documented a rapidly worsening epidemic of silicosis, an incurable and often fatal lung disease, among California workers who cut and fabricate quartz countertops, with case numbers more than doubling over the past 16 months as researchers warn the true national scope of the problem likely extends far beyond the state.

The report, published August 12 in the journal NEJM Evidence, identified 592 cases of silicosis among quartz countertop fabrication workers in California between January 2019 and June 2026. Of those workers, 65 have required lung transplants and 31 have died. The study was authored by researchers from the California Department of Public Health, the University of California, Los Angeles, the University of California, San Francisco, and George Washington University’s Milken Institute School of Public Health.

According to the California Department of Public Health, the median age of workers diagnosed with silicosis is 46, while the median age of those who have died from the disease is 52, a notably young age range for a fatal occupational lung condition. Men account for 99% of all documented cases, and roughly half of all cases identified statewide were reported in Los Angeles County.

The pace of new diagnoses has accelerated sharply in recent years. According to reporting from Tech Times, the state’s tracked case count grew from 259 cases and 15 deaths as of March 2025 to 592 cases and 31 deaths by June 2026, more than doubling in just 16 months. Amy Heinzerling, chief of the health department’s Emerging Workplace Hazards Unit and the study’s lead author, told a state regulatory hearing in May that officials had identified 85 new cases in just the first four months of 2026 alone, a pace that would represent the fastest single-year rate of accumulation since the state began actively tracking the disease.

Quartz, technically known as engineered stone, has become an increasingly popular material for kitchen and bathroom countertops in recent years due to its durability and resistance to scratching and staining compared with natural stone alternatives. The material typically contains more than 90% crystalline silica, far higher than natural stone, and generates fine, breathable silica dust when workers cut, grind or polish it during fabrication, according to health officials.

Silicosis develops when workers inhale extremely small crystalline silica particles that become permanently lodged in lung tissue, gradually reducing the lungs’ ability to absorb oxygen. The disease is progressive, has no cure, and can only be managed through measures like supplemental oxygen or bronchodilators to ease breathing, according to the Cleveland Clinic. In its most severe form, the disease can require a lung transplant or ultimately prove fatal.

David Michaels, a co-author of the report, professor at George Washington University’s Milken Institute School of Public Health, and former head of the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration, described the underlying cause of the epidemic in blunt terms. “Workers have been sickened making quartz countertops, a product we do not need,” Michaels said in a statement, noting that safer alternative materials are readily available. He added that the documented California cases likely represent only a fraction of the true national total, since California remains the only state actively conducting population-level surveillance for the disease even though stone fabrication shops operate in every major metropolitan area across the country.

California officials have said they are now pursuing regulatory and legislative action in response to the report’s findings, with the study’s authors specifically pointing to Australia as a model worth following. Australia became the first country in the world to fully ban engineered stone products in 2023, a decision made explicitly to protect fabrication workers from silica dust exposure.

The report’s release comes amid a separate, high-stakes legislative fight in Washington that could significantly affect sickened workers’ ability to pursue compensation. A bill sponsored by Rep. Tom McClintock, a California Republican, passed the House Judiciary Committee by a 16-7 vote on June 3, and would prohibit lawsuits against manufacturers, distributors and sellers of crystalline silica engineered stone products. According to Tech Times, the legislation would affect roughly 500 pending California lawsuits filed by workers who have already been diagnosed with silicosis or who have already undergone lung transplants. Michaels has testified against the bill before the House Judiciary Committee, arguing it would strip affected workers of their primary legal recourse against manufacturers even as some of those same companies continue selling safer alternative products in markets like Australia.

The California epidemic first drew significant medical attention following a 2023 study published in JAMA Internal Medicine documenting a cluster of 52 young, predominantly Spanish-speaking countertop workers who developed severe silicosis in California between 2019 and 2022, prompting the state’s public health department to issue a formal hazard alert warning fabrication workers about the risks and encouraging them to seek medical evaluation.

With case counts continuing to climb and the legislative fight over manufacturer liability still unresolved in Congress, public health officials say the epidemic remains an active and growing crisis, one they argue requires urgent national surveillance and stronger workplace protections to prevent further illness and death among a workforce already facing the disease’s devastating, irreversible effects.

This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.