ABSTRACT
This paper is focused on the hydrogeochemical characterization of the Negro River along its course, as well as in the proposal of a functioning model for the contamination processes in order to establish potential cause-effect relationships between water quality, geology (ARD), mining activities (AMD) and the tectonic framework as transmission vector of acidity, metals and sulphates. The scenario shows a heavily-contaminated river compared to the unaffected regional background. By graphical and statistical treatments of physico-chemical data of Negro River and the unaffected values of regional background and other AMD/ARD representative rivers' it is possible to conclude that Antamina Mine, is not the cause of the Negro River contamination, without the need of isotopic tracers, but just through the inexistent concentrations of Cu, Bi and Mo found in the waters. In the proposed contamination model, climatic factors (glacial retreat) activate geological (ARD) processes. The tectonic scenario (faults) intervenes as a transport medium of the contamination flux from the sulphide oxidation surface in upper altitudes until the spring in lower altitudes. At the end, it is concluded that this contamination comes from the recent glacial retreat in areas near the Cordillera Blanca that has left massive amounts of sulphide materials exposed to weathering conditions, oxidizing naturally (ARD processes) and finally contributing to the contamination of the Negro River through faults. In this case, we would face an ARD process in the strict sense, which is the direct oxidation of sulphides outcropping in the upper part of the mountain with the generation of sulphates, the release of hydrogen ions and the consequent generation of acid and the dissolution of the metals. This ARD process would come from the glacial retreat, which, through the faults, transports contaminated water until the spring.
ABSTRACT
The use of placebo control groups (e.g., subjects using calcium and vitamin D) in osteoporosis trials with subjects at high risk for fracture has been systematically questioned by institutional review boards (IRBs). Regulatory agencies, on the other hand, continue to not only recommend but also require that placebo-controlled trials be presented for the registration of new drugs for osteoporosis treatment. The Declaration of Helsinki and its updates have upheld the principle that protection of research subjects' rights is of primary concern. Nevertheless, even the Declaration keeps clearly opening the possibility of using placebo-control designs if it is justified for "compelling and scientifically sound methodological reasons." The use of intermediary endpoints or surrogates to establish the efficacy or safety of new medications in the management of osteoporosis is currently considered scientifically insufficient. This concept has led regulatory agencies, such as the Food and Drug Administration in the United States and the European Medicines Agency in the European Union, to require "fragility fracture reduction" as the primary endpoint in clinical trials for the registration of new drugs. Superiority or noninferiority trials are alternatives to placebo-controlled designs. However, factors such as sample size, cost, and statistical limitations render these models impractical for the registration of new medications for osteoporosis. We recommend collaboration among regulatory agencies, IRBs, scientists, and ethicists on the design of clinical trials for the registration of new medications for reduction of fracture risk. Delay in developing mutually acceptable models may impair scientific development in the field and possibly deprive patients of potentially beneficial treatments.