Connect with us

INTERNACIONAL

Nanoplásticos en los alimentos: descubren partículas en rabanitos

Published

on

[ad_1]

Un estudio británico detecta nanoplásticos
Un estudio británico detecta nanoplásticos en las raíces y hojas comestibles de rábanos, lo que plantea dudas sobre la seguridad alimentaria (Imagen Ilustrativa Infobae)

Investigadores del Reino Unido confirmaron la presencia de nanoplásticos en las partes comestibles de los rábanos, lo que sugiere una posible amenaza para la seguridad alimentaria. Un estudio reciente realizado por la Universidad de Plymouth demostró que estos fragmentos diminutos de plástico pueden traspasar las barreras naturales de las plantas y acumularse en raíces y hojas, hechos que generan preocupación por las consecuencias en la alimentación humana.

Según la publicación de Le Point, el experimento consistió en cultivar rábanos en sistemas hidropónicos y exponerlos a una cantidad determinada de nanoplásticos. Los resultados mostraron que cerca del cinco por ciento de los nanoplásticos añadidos al entorno fueron absorbidos por los cultivos. De acuerdo con los científicos responsables, aproximadamente una cuarta parte de esos residuos plásticos permaneció en la raíz comestible, mientras que el diez por ciento se detectó en las hojas.

Estos hallazgos resultan relevantes porque hasta ahora se consideraba que la banda de Caspary, una defensa natural de las plantas, impedía el ingreso de sustancias indeseables. “Es la primera vez que se demuestra que las partículas de nanoplástico pueden cruzar esta barrera”, señaló Nathaniel Clark, profesor de fisiología en la Universidad de Plymouth. El experto explicó que el rábano fue elegido debido a su importancia agroindustrial y a que representa cerca del dos por ciento de la producción global de verduras.

Advertisement
Investigadores de la Universidad de
Investigadores de la Universidad de Plymouth demostraron que los nanoplásticos pueden atravesar las defensas naturales de las plantas y acumularse en los cultivos (EFE/ Cote Villegas)

Las plantas pueden actuar como depósitos de partículas plásticas”, explicó Clark. A diferencia de los animales, que cuentan con mecanismos para eliminar partículas extrañas a través del sistema digestivo o los riñones, los vegetales carecen de estos procesos. Según el científico, la falta de mecanismos efectivos de eliminación podría implicar una amenaza a largo plazo para la seguridad alimentaria.

El profesor Richard Thompson, coautor del trabajo, afirmó que la contaminación por microplásticos y nanoplásticos aparece en zonas inesperadas: “Encontramos contaminación microplástica dondequiera que la buscamos.” El académico remarcó que la investigación contribuye a comprender mejor cómo estas partículas se acumulan y los potenciales riesgos para la salud humana.

La técnica empleada para rastrear los nanoplásticos implicó el uso de radiomarcadores de carbono. Este método permitió identificar y cuantificar con alta precisión la presencia de partículas en los tejidos vegetales. Clark explicó que la diferencia isotópica del carbono empleado facilitó el seguimiento del recorrido de los nanoplásticos en el cuerpo del rábano.

De acuerdo con el equipo investigador, el experimento se centró en el poliestireno, un componente muy común en envases y productos cotidianos. Sin embargo, Clark advirtió que los resultados no necesariamente se pueden extrapolar de manera inmediata a todos los tipos de plástico. El tamaño, la forma y la química superficial de las partículas podrían alterar su comportamiento y su interacción con diferentes cultivos. “El poliestireno es un buen punto de partida, pero no representa la totalidad de la problemática”, puntualizó el investigador a Le Point.

Advertisement
El experimento utilizó rábanos cultivados
El experimento utilizó rábanos cultivados en sistemas hidropónicos y expuestos a poliestireno, un plástico común en envases (Canva)

Hasta el momento, la gran limitación para detectar nanoplásticos en alimentos radicaba en su tamaño, que es diez veces menor al diámetro de un cabello humano, y en que su estructura de carbono los hace casi indistinguibles de los tejidos vegetales. “Identificar unas pocas nanoesferas plásticas en una montaña de polvo de carbón resulta muy difícil, ya que ambas comparten características físicas y químicas”, ilustró Clark.

La comunidad científica estima necesario ampliar el alcance de estas investigaciones a situaciones agrícolas reales, más allá del laboratorio, con el fin de determinar los niveles de nanoplásticos en productos comerciales o cultivados en huertos domésticos. Según los expertos consultados por Le Point, será indispensable profundizar en los riesgos para la salud de los consumidores y en el recorrido de estas micropartículas a lo largo de las cadenas tróficas.

Clark indicó que los beneficios de consumir verduras continúan superando los riesgos identificados en la investigación. El especialista desaconsejó modificar hábitos alimentarios a partir de estos resultados, ya que las ventajas nutricionales de las hortalizas siguen siendo superiores, según la evidencia actual.

Diferentes voces alertaron que la contaminación derivada de plásticos no se limita a vegetales terrestres. La comunidad científica ya había documentado la presencia de microplásticos en mariscos y peces. La acumulación de residuos plásticos en alimentos vegetales constituye un fenómeno adicional que amplía las preguntas sobre la exposición humana a contaminantes invisibles.

Advertisement
Los expertos advierten que los
Los expertos advierten que los resultados no se pueden extrapolar a todos los tipos de plástico, ya que el comportamiento varía según el material (Imagen Ilustrativa Infobae)

Las autoridades sanitarias y los organismos reguladores comenzaron a seguir con detalle el desarrollo de estas investigaciones. Los criterios para evaluar la seguridad alimentaria podrían incorporar nuevas variables y protocolos de monitoreo, a medida que surjan evidencias sobre la magnitud y el impacto de los nanoplásticos en productos de uso común.

Se espera que los próximos pasos incluyan estudios de campo en explotaciones agrarias y análisis comparativos entre cultivos bajo diferentes condiciones ambientales y métodos de riego, para determinar cuáles son los factores que favorecen una mayor o menor acumulación de partículas plásticas.

El avance de esta línea de investigación plantea nuevos desafíos a escala global. La posible transferencia de nanoplásticos a lo largo de la cadena alimentaria y su comportamiento dentro del organismo humano serán dos cuestiones clave en los próximos años. Por ahora, el consenso científico insiste en la necesidad de afrontar la contaminación plástica desde múltiples ángulos y en la urgencia de profundizar el conocimiento sobre la exposición invisible que afecta tanto a ecosistemas marinos como terrestres, así como a la propia seguridad alimentaria.



rábano,nanoplásticos

[ad_2]

Advertisement
Advertisement

US capture of Maduro championed, condemned across world stage after surgical Venezuela strikes

Published

on

[ad_1]

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

World leaders were sharply divided Saturday after the United States launched a large-scale strike on Venezuela and President Donald Trump announced that the country’s leader, Nicolás Maduro, had been captured and flown out of the country.

Advertisement

Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez condemned what he called a «criminal attack,» writing on X that, «Our zone of peace is being brutally assaulted.» Communist Cuba is a supporter of the Maduro government and has been a longtime adversary of the United States.

Colombian President Gustavo Petro said his government viewed the reports coming out of Venezuela «with deep concern,» and he warned against further escalation, claiming the U.S. strikes risked destabilizing the region.

«The Colombian Government rejects any unilateral military action that could aggravate the situation or put the civilian population at risk,» Petro wrote on X.

Advertisement

US COAST GUARD PURSUES THIRD ‘DARK FLEET’ OIL TANKER AS TRUMP TARGETS VENEZUELAN SANCTIONS EVASION NETWORK

Maduro at military parade

World leaders react with condemnation, concern, and praise after the U.S. launches a strike on Venezuela as Trump claims Maduro was allegedly captured. (JUAN BARRETO/AFP via Getty Images)

Petro said Colombia is taking preventive measures to «protect the civilian population» and «preserve stability on the Colombian-Venezuelan border,» although he did not provide exact details.

Mexico also condemned the U.S. military intervention in Venezuela, saying it was a «clear violation» of international law and urging an end to what it described as «any acts of aggression» against Venezuela.

Advertisement

«Latin America and the Caribbean is a zone of peace,» a statement released by the Mexican foreign ministry reads. The statement was shared by Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum on X.

It warned that any military action puts regional stability at «serious risk.»

Iran’s Foreign Ministry also condemned the strikes.

Advertisement

Meanwhile, President Javier Milei of Argentina, a close ally of Trump, praised the news by sharing a previous video of him denouncing Maduro’s «narco-terrorist» regime as a regional threat and urging Latin American leaders to back U.S. pressure to end it.

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION TARGETS MADURO’S INNER CIRCLE, FAMILY IN MAJOR NARCO-STATE CRACKDOWN

Protesters in Caracas hold large posters of Nicolás Maduro and Hugo Chávez during a rally.

Demonstrators hold posters of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, right, and late former President Hugo Chávez during a rally in Caracas, Venezuela. (Jesus Vargas/Getty Images)

«Long live freedom, dammit!» Milei wrote, using his signature pro-freedom chant.

Advertisement

In Europe, European Council President António Costa said he was following developments in Venezuela «with great concern,» urging de-escalation and respect for international law.

«The European Union calls for de-escalation and a resolution in full respect of international law and the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations,» Costa said, adding that the bloc would continue to support a «peaceful, democratic, and inclusive solution» in Venezuela.

In the U.K., Reform leader and staunch Trump ally Nigel Farage questioned the legality of the attack but said it may lead to a favorable outcome.

Advertisement
Argentina-Milei

Argentina President Javier Milei praised the news by sharing a previous video of him denouncing Maduro’s «narco-terrorist» regime as a regional threat. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko)

«The American actions in Venezuela overnight are unorthodox and contrary to international law — but if they make China and Russia think twice, it may be a good thing,» Farage wrote. «I hope the Venezuelan people can now turn a new leaf without Maduro.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Meanwhile, in Venezuela, the government called on citizens to mobilize against what it labeled an «imperialist attack,» urging, «People to the streets!»

Advertisement

Regional reaction elsewhere in Latin America was muted in the early hours after the strike, with several governments remaining silent as uncertainty grew over who was in control in Caracas.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Advertisement

[ad_2]

world,world politics,south america,venezuelan political crisis,military,donald trump

Advertisement
Continue Reading

INTERNACIONAL

La fiscal general de Estados Unidos confirmó la imputación de Nicolás Maduro por narcoterrorismo

Published

on

[ad_1]

ARCHIVO: La fiscal general de
ARCHIVO: La fiscal general de Estados Unidos, Pamela Bondi, habla durante una conferencia de prensa del presidente estadounidense Donald Trump, en la Sala de Prensa de la Casa Blanca, en Washington D.C., Estados Unidos, el 11 de agosto de 2025 (Reuters)

En una declaración oficial difundida en redes sociales, la fiscal general Pamela Bondi confirmó la imputación de Nicolás Maduro y su esposa, Cilia Flores, en el tribunal del Distrito Sur de Nueva York, un hecho que eleva la tensión diplomática entre Venezuela y Estados Unidos. “Nicolás Maduro ha sido acusado de conspiración para narcoterrorismo, conspiración para importar cocaína, posesión de ametralladoras y artefactos destructivos, y conspiración para poseer ametralladoras y artefactos destructivos contra Estados Unidos”, afirmó Bondi.

La gravedad de los cargos ilustra la magnitud de la investigación. La funcionaria estadounidense subrayó el alcance internacional de la acusación, al precisar que “pronto, enfrentarán toda la fuerza de la justicia estadounidense en suelo estadounidense y en tribunales estadounidenses”.

El comunicado reservó palabras de reconocimiento para las autoridades y fuerzas militares estadounidenses involucradas. De acuerdo con Bondi, “en nombre de todo el Departamento de Justicia de Estados Unidos, quiero agradecer al presidente Trump por tener el coraje de exigir rendición de cuentas en nombre del pueblo estadounidense”.

Advertisement

El respaldo institucional incluyó un elogio expreso para los equipos responsables de la operación, que consideró un éxito operacional. La fiscal general añadió: “Y un enorme agradecimiento a nuestros valientes militares, quienes llevaron a cabo la increíble y altamente exitosa misión para capturar a estos dos presuntos narcotraficantes internacionales”, destacó Bondi en X.

Maduroenfrentará a la justicia federal de Estados Unidos tras ser capturado por el Ejército norteamericano en la madrugada de este sábado. El líder chavista es acusado de liderar el “Cartel de los Soles”, una organización que fue incluida por el gobierno de Donald Trump en la lista de grupos narcoterroristas.

Entre las acusaciones figuran conspiración para narcotráfico internacional, narcoterrorismo, conspiración para importar cocaína a territorio estadounidense y vínculos con organizaciones armadas, como las FARC, para emplear el narcotráfico con fines políticos.

Advertisement

Fuertes explosiones, acompañadas de sonidos similares a los de aviones sobrevolando la zona, se registraron alrededor de las 02:00 hora local (06:00 GMT) de este sábado en Caracas. Se trató del ataque “a gran escala” llevado adelante por el ejército estadounidense, según la confirmación del presidente Trump.

“Estados Unidos ha llevado a cabo con éxito un ataque a gran escala contra Venezuela y su líder,el presidente Nicolás Maduro, fue capturado y trasladado en avión junto con su esposa, fuera del país”, escribió el mandatario en un mensaje en su red Truth Social.

A través de las redes sociales, los usuarios postearon videos de explosiones y sobrevuelos en la capital venezonala. En ese sentido, también reportaron ataques aéreos en las bases militares La Carlota y Fuerte Tiuna, mientras residentes de la capital afirman escuchar el ruido de aviones sobrevolando la zona.

Advertisement

En una breve entrevista telefónica con el diario The New York Times durante la madrugada, Trump reiteró que consideraba la operación como “brillante”.

La captura de Maduro y Flores marca un punto de inflexión en la crisis venezolana, mientras la comunidad internacional permanece atenta a los próximos anuncios de las autoridades estadounidenses.

Según informó el senador republicano Mike Lee tras mantener una conversación con el secretario de Estado de Estados Unidos, Marco RubioNicolás Maduro fue capturado por Estados Unidos y enfrentará un juicio penal en territorio estadounidense. Según Lee, Rubio indicó además que, tras la detención, no se prevén nuevas acciones militares en el país.

Advertisement

El funcionario estadounidense mencionó meses atrás que Maduro era considerado por Estados Unidos como “fugitivo de la justicia norteamericana” y “narcoterrorista”. En ese sentido, sostuvo que el recientemente capturado no era “ni líder legítimo, ni jefe de Estado” en Venezuela. Señaló que un gran jurado en el estado de Nueva York lo encausó por delitos de narcotráfico y terrorismo.



North America,Government / Politics,WASHINGTON

[ad_2]

Advertisement
Continue Reading

INTERNACIONAL

Key takeaways from Jack Smith’s testimony to House Judiciary Committee

Published

on

[ad_1]

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Former special counsel Jack Smith used a closed-door deposition with House Republicans last month to defend his investigations into Donald Trump’s alleged effort to subvert the 2020 presidential election and his alleged retention of certain classified documents, using the hours-long testimony to forcefully dispute the notion that his team had acted politically, and citing what he described as ample evidence to support the indictments that had been levied against Trump. 

Advertisement

«I made my decisions in the investigation without regard to President Trump’s political association, activities, beliefs, or candidacy in the 2024 presidential election,» Smith told members of the House Judiciary Committee in the Dec. 17 interview.

The interview was Smith’s first time appearing before Congress since he left his role as special counsel in 2024. And while much of the information was not new, the exchange was punctuated by sharp exchanges with Republicans on the panel, both on the strength of the case, and on his own actions taken during the course of the probe — most recently, on the tolling records his team sought from a handful of Republican lawmakers over the course of the investigation. Republicans have assailed the records as being at odds with the speech or debate clause of the Constitution.  

«I made my decisions in the investigation without regard to President Trump’s political association, activities, beliefs, or candidacy in the 2024 presidential election,» Smith told the committee. «We took actions based on what the facts, and the law required — the very lesson I learned early in my career as a prosecutor.»

Advertisement

Republicans on the panel ultimately opted to publish the redacted transcript on New Year’s Eve, a decision that may have helped dull the impact of any news the 255-page document may have generated amid the broader hustle and bustle of the holiday season.

Here are some of the biggest moments and notable exchanges from the eight-hour hearing. 

 TRUMP STRIPS SECURITY CLEARANCES FROM LAW FIRM TIED TO JACK SMITH CASES

Advertisement
Special Counsel Jack Smith arrives to remarks on a recently unsealed indictment including four felony counts against former President Donald Trump in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Special Counsel Jack Smith arrives to remarks on a recently unsealed indictment including four felony counts against former President Donald Trump in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images) (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

New political tensions 

Smith was tapped by former Attorney General Merrick Garland in 2022 to investigate the alleged effort by Trump and his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 election, as well as Trump’s keeping of allegedly classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago residence in Palm Beach after leaving office in 2020. Smith had brought charges against Trump in both cases.

The charges were dropped after Trump’s election, in keeping with a longstanding Justice Department policy that discourages investigating sitting presidents for federal criminal charges, and Smith resigned from his role shortly after.

If nothing else, Smith’s Dec. 17 testimony underscored just how much has changed since Trump’s reelection in 2024. 

Advertisement

Trump, for his part, has used his first year back in office to follow through on his promises to go after his perceived political «enemies,» including by revoking security clearances of many individuals, including employees of a D.C.-based law firm that represents Smith, and taking other punitive measures to punish or fire FBI agents involved in the Jan. 6, 2021, investigation.

During his testimony last month, Smith fiercely disputed the notion that Trump’s remarks about the 2020 election results would be protected by the First Amendment. 

«Absololutely not,» he said in response to a lawyer for Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee.

Advertisement

The lawyer then ticked through a «long list of disputed elections» in U.S. history and former presidents who have spoken out about «what they believed to be fraud,» or other issues regarding election integrity. «I think you would agree that those types of statements are sort of at the core of the First Amendment rights of a presidential candidate, right?»

«There is no historical analog for what President Trump did in this case,» Smith said immediately. 

JACK SMITH SUBPOENAED FOR DEPOSITION WITH HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

Advertisement
Donald Trump and attorney Todd Blanche

Former President Donald Trump and attorney Todd Blanche return from a lunch break in his trial at Manhattan court in New York on Thursday, April 18, 2024. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via AP, Pool)

‘Powerful’ evidence

Smith told members that the special counsel ultimately gathered evidence against Trump that was, in his view, sufficient to secure a conviction.

«He made false statements to state legislatures, to his supporters in all sorts of contexts and was aware in the days leading up to Jan. 6th that his supporters were angry when he invited them, and then he directed them to the Capitol,» Smith said of Trump’ actions in the run-up to Jan. 6. 

«Now, once they were at the Capitol and once the attack on the Capitol happened, he refused to stop it. He instead issued a tweet that, without question in my mind, endangered the life of his own vice president,» Smith added. «And when the violence was going on, he had to be pushed repeatedly by his staff members to do anything to quell it.»

Advertisement

Other possible co-conspirators had not been charged, as Smith noted at one point during the interview. 

But Smith said in the testimony that his team had developed «proof beyond a reasonable doubt» that Trump «engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election and to prevent the lawful transfer of power.»

They’d also developed what he described as «powerful evidence» that Trump willfully retained highly classified documents after leaving office in January 2021 at his private Mar-a-Lago residence, and was obstructing the government’s efforts to recover the records.

Advertisement

Smith’s team had not determined how to proceed for possible ‘co-conspirators’

Smith said that, when the special counsel wound down in the wake of the 2024 elections, his team had not determined whether to charge the key Trump allies who may or may not have acted as co-conspirators, including Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell and John Eastman.

«As we stated in the final report, we analyzed the evidence against different co-conspirators,» Smith said. Smith reiterated his allegation that Trump was «the most culpable» and «most responsible» person for the alleged attempts to subvert the 2020 election results. 

He said the special counsel had «determined that we did have evidence to charge people at a certain point in time.» 

Advertisement

But at the time the investigation was wound down, they had not made «final determinations about that at the time that President Trump won reelection, meaning that our office was going to be closed down.»

FBI OUSTS FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR, AGENT INVOLVED IN J6 PROSECUTIONS, WITH MORE EXPECTED

Former Department of Justice Special Counsel Jack Smith on Capitol Hill

Former Department of Justice Special Counsel Jack Smith enters a room in the Rayburn House Office Building to give his deposition before the House Judiciary Committee, part of its oversight into DOJ investigations into President Donald Trump, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Dec. 17, 2025. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo)

He lamented the ousting of DOJ, FBI officials 

Smith used his opening remarks to lament the ousting of FBI agents and Justice Department officials involved in the Jan. 6 investigations.

Advertisement

«I am both saddened and angered that President Trump has sought revenge against career prosecutors, FBI agents, and support staff simply for doing their jobs and for having worked on those cases,» Smith said.

His remarks came after the FBI in recent months ousted a handful of personnel involved in the Jan. 6 investigations, an effort individuals familiar with the action described to Fox News at the time as an act of «retaliation.»

Thousands of FBI personnel in February were forced to fill out a sprawling questionnaire asking employees detailed questions about any role they may have played in the investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol riots — ranging from whether they had testified in any criminal trials to when they last participated in investigation-related activity.

Advertisement

FBI AGENTS SUE TRUMP DOJ TO BLOCK ANY PUBLIC IDENTIFICATION OF EMPLOYEES WHO WORKED ON JAN. 6 INVESTIGATIONS

Smith’s team didn’t tell the courts that subpoenaed phone records belonged to lawmakers

Smith was grilled during the deposition about the highly scrutinized subpoenas his team issued to phone companies for data belonging to House and Senate lawmakers as part of his investigation, saying they aligned with the Justice Department’s policy at the time.

Smith said the Public Integrity Section signed off on the subpoenas, a point corroborated by records previously released by Grassley’s office. 

Advertisement

Those records also showed that the Public Integrity Section told prosecutors to be wary of concerns lawmakers could raise about the Constitution’s speech or debate clause, which gives Congress members added protections.

The subpoenas to the phone companies were accompanied by gag orders blocking the lawmakers from learning about the existence of the subpoenas for at least one year. Smith said the D.C. federal court, which authorized the gag orders, would not have been aware that they applied to Congress members.»I don’t think we identified that, because I don’t think that was Department policy at the time,» Smith said.

Asked during the deposition about who should be held accountable for lawmakers who felt that the seizure of a narrow set of their phone data was a constitutional violation, Smith said Trump should be held accountable.

Advertisement

«These records are people, in the case of the Senators, Donald Trump directed his co-conspirators to call these people to further delay the proceedings,» Smith said.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

«He chose to do that. If Donald Trump had chosen to call a number of Democratic Senators, we would have gotten toll records for Democratic Senators. So responsibility for why these records, why we collected them, that’s — that lies with Donald Trump,» he said.

Advertisement

donald trump,politics,justice department,federal courts

[ad_2]

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tendencias