Tag: study

Categories
Life Style

Is the Internet bad for you? Huge study reveals surprise effect on well-being

[ad_1]

A woman and a man sit in bed in a dark bedroom, distracted by a laptop computer and a smartphone respectively.

People who had access to the Internet scored higher on measures of life satisfaction in a global survey.Credit: Ute Grabowsky/Photothek via Getty

A global, 16-year study1 of 2.4 million people has found that Internet use might boost measures of well-being, such as life satisfaction and sense of purpose — challenging the commonly held idea that Internet use has negative effects on people’s welfare.

“It’s an important piece of the puzzle on digital-media use and mental health,” says psychologist Markus Appel at the University of Würzburg in Germany. “If social media and Internet and mobile-phone use is really such a devastating force in our society, we should see it on this bird’s-eye view [study] — but we don’t.” Such concerns are typically related to behaviours linked to social-media use, such as cyberbullying, social-media addiction and body-image issues. But the best studies have so far shown small negative effects, if any2,3, of Internet use on well-being, says Appel.

The authors of the latest study, published on 13 May in Technology, Mind and Behaviour, sought to capture a more global picture of the Internet’s effects than did previous research. “While the Internet is global, the study of it is not,” said Andrew Przybylski, a researcher at the University of Oxford, UK, who studies how technology affects well-being, in a press briefing on 9 May. “More than 90% of data sets come from a handful of English-speaking countries” that are mostly in the global north, he said. Previous studies have also focused on young people, he added.

To address this research gap, Pryzbylski and his colleagues analysed data on how Internet access was related to eight measures of well-being from the Gallup World Poll, conducted by analytics company Gallup, based in Washington DC. The data were collected annually from 2006 to 2021 from 1,000 people, aged 15 and above, in 168 countries, through phone or in-person interviews. The researchers controlled for factors that might affect Internet use and welfare, including income level, employment status, education level and health problems.

Like a walk in nature

The team found that, on average, people who had access to the Internet scored 8% higher on measures of life satisfaction, positive experiences and contentment with their social life, compared with people who lacked web access. Online activities can help people to learn new things and make friends, and this could contribute to the beneficial effects, suggests Appel.

The positive effect is similar to the well-being benefit associated with taking a walk in nature, says Przybylski.

However, women aged 15–24 who reported having used the Internet in the past week were, on average, less happy with the place they live, compared with people who didn’t use the web. This could be because people who do not feel welcome in their community spend more time online, said Przybylski. Further studies are needed to determine whether links between Internet use and well-being are causal or merely associations, he added.

The study comes at a time of discussion around the regulation of Internet and social-media use, especially among young people. “The study cannot contribute to the recent debate on whether or not social-media use is harmful, or whether or not smartphones should be banned at schools,” because the study was not designed to answer these questions, says Tobias Dienlin, who studies how social media affects well-being at the University of Vienna. “Different channels and uses of the Internet have vastly different effects on well-being outcomes,” he says.

[ad_2]

Source Article Link

Categories
Life Style

Why it’s essential to study sex and gender, even as tensions rise

[ad_1]

Person in a black t-shirt holding a sign protests outside the school districts educational support complex in Katy.

In 2023, students protested against a new policy in Texas, where parents would be notified if their child asks to be identified as transgender.Credit: Brett Coomer/Houston Chronicle/Getty

This week, Nature is launching a collection of opinion articles on sex and gender in research. Further articles will be published in the coming months. The series will highlight the necessity and challenges of studying a topic that is both hugely under-researched and, increasingly, the focus of arguments worldwide — many of which are neither healthy nor constructive.

Some scientists have been warned off studying sex differences by colleagues. Others, who are already working on sex or gender-related topics, are hesitant to publish their views. Such a climate of fear and reticence serves no one. To find a way forward we need more knowledge, not less.

Nearly 20 researchers from diverse fields, including neuroscience, psychology, immunology and cancer, have contributed to the series, which provides a snapshot of where scholars studying sex and gender are aligned — and where they are not. In time, we hope this collection will help to shape research, and provide a reference point for moderating often-intemperate debates.

In practice, people use sex and gender to mean different things. But researchers studying animals typically use sex to refer to male and female individuals, as defined by various anatomical and other biological features. In studies involving humans, participants are generally asked to identify their own sex and/or gender category. Here, gender usually encompasses social and environmental factors, including gender roles, expectations and identity.

For as long as scientific inquiry has existed, people have mainly studied men or male animals. Even as recently as 2009, only 26% of studies using animals included both female and male individuals, according to a review of 10 fields in the biological sciences1. This bias has had serious consequences. Between 1997 and 2000, for instance, eight prescription drugs were removed from the US market, because clinical testing had not revealed women’s greater risk of developing health problems after taking the drugs.

The tide, however, is turning. Many journals, including those in the Nature Portfolio, and funders, such as the US National Institutes of Health, have developed guidelines and mandates to encourage scientists to consider sex and, where appropriate, gender in their work.

These efforts are reaping benefits2. Studies, for example, are showing that a person’s sex and/or gender can influence their risk of disease and chances of survival when it comes to many common causes of death — including cardiovascular conditions and cancer.

Despite this, many researchers remain unconvinced that the inclusion of sex and gender information is important in their field. Others, who are already doing so, have told Nature that they’re afraid of how their work is perceived and of how it could be misunderstood, or misused.

Because researchers who are exploring the effects of sex and gender come from many disciplines, there will be disagreements. An often-raised and valid concern, for example, is that when researchers compare responses between female and male animals, or between men and women, they exclude those whose sex and/or gender doesn’t fall into a binary categorization scheme. Another is that variability between individuals of the same sex could be more important than that between sexes.

Sometimes sense does seem to get lost in the debates. That the term sex refers to a lot of interacting factors, which are not fully understood, does not invalidate its usefulness as a concept3. That some people misinterpret and misuse findings concerning differences between sexes, particularly in relation to the human brain, should not mean denying that any differences exist.

Tempering the debate

Many of the questions being raised, however, are important to ask, especially given concerns about how best to investigate biological differences between groups of humans, and the continued — and, in some regions, worsening — marginalization of people whose sex and/or gender identity doesn’t fall into narrowly defined norms. Often, such questions and concerns can be addressed through research. For example, studies might find that variability between individuals of the same sex in diet, or body weight, say, are more important predictors of how likely they are to develop anaemia than whether they are male or female.

The problem, then is not the discussions alone: science exists to examine and interrogate disagreements. Rather, the problem is that debates — and work on sex and gender, in general — are being used to polarize opinions about gender identity. As Arthur Arnold, a biologist at the University of California, Los Angeles, and his colleagues describe in their Comment article, last September, legislation banning gender-affirming medical care for people under 18 years old was introduced in Texas on the basis of claims that everyone belongs to one of two gender groups, and that this reality is settled by science. It isn’t. Scientists are reluctant to study sex and gender, not just because of concerns about the complexity and costs of the research, but also because of current tensions.

But it is crucial that scholars do not refrain from considering the effects of sex and gender if such analyses are relevant to their field. Improved knowledge will help to resolve concerns and allow a scholarly consensus to be reached, where possible. Where disagreements persist, our hope is that Nature’s collection of opinion articles will equip researchers with the tools needed to help them persuade others that going back to assuming that male individuals represent everyone is no longer an option.

[ad_2]

Source Article Link

Categories
Bisnis Industri

CompTIA study guides | Cult of Mac

[ad_1]

A photo of people using CompTIA study guides to get ready for IT certification exams.
Study guides for CompTIA, Salesforce and more are now an additional 20% off.
Photo: Cult of Mac Deals

If you want a successful career in IT, you need the proper certifications. This limited-time deal on CompTIA study guides will help you rack up those crucial IT certifications and broaden your horizons. Through April 7, you can get a lifetime subscription to The CompTIA and IT Exam Study Guides Training for an extra 20% off with code SECURE20.

That drops the price to just $23.99 (regularly $259). You’ll gain a lifetime of lessons on CompTIA and IT topics including Amazon Web Services, Salesforce, Microsoft Azure and much more.

A lifetime of expert-designed, IT-centered materials

Landing the perfect job takes hard work, a stellar resume and at least a little luck. These training guides help with the first part of that equation. They cover the IT latest topics and help you prep for the certification exams from the Computing Technology Industry Association, aka CompTIA.

Available for a one-time payment with the promise of updates for a lifetime, this collection of (four-star rated!) study guides comes from Guides Digest. The affordable IT educational bundle features the following classes:

  • CompTIA A+ (220-1101 & 220-1102) Study Guide
  • CompTIA Network+ (N10-008) Study Guide
  • CompTIA Security+ (SY0-601) Study Guide
  • CompTIA CySA+ (CS0-003) Study Guide

  • AWS Certified Cloud Practitioner (CLF-C01) Study Guide
  • Microsoft Azure Fundamentals (AZ-900) Study Guide
  • Salesforce Associate Certification Study Guide
  • CCNA (200-301) Study Guide
  • (ISC)² Certified in Cybersecurity℠ – CC Study Guide
  • Project Management Professional (PMP) Study Guide

Each study guide is designed to break down typically complex subjects into digestible parts. This innovative learning approach boasts a history of success, allowing users to gain industry knowledge and prep for related certification exams. Students will even gain certificates of completion at the end of each study guide.

Save on CompTIA study guides that will prep you for crucial IT exams

Get lifetime access to The CompTIA and IT Exam Study Guides Training for an extra 20% off — just $23.99 when you enter code SECURE20 at checkout. Offer ends April 7 at 11:59 p.m. Pacific.

Buy from: Cult of Mac Deals

Prices subject to change. All sales handled by StackSocial, our partner who runs Cult of Mac Deals. For customer support, please email StackSocial directly.



[ad_2]

Source Article Link

Categories
Life Style

how it will help scientists to study the Sun

[ad_1]

Researchers in North America are gearing up for their chance to observe the Sun’s corona — its wispy outer atmosphere — like never before. Normally hidden to the naked eye by the Sun’s glare, the corona will be visible to millions from Sinaloa, Mexico, to Newfoundland, Canada, when the Moon blocks the solar disk during the total eclipse on 8 April. Importantly, the event coincides with the solar maximum — a period of extreme activity that occurs every 11 years. During this time, the Sun’s magnetic fields intensify, creating sunspots, fiery loops of plasma and exciting structures in the corona.

The Sun’s outer atmosphere, named for its crown-like appearance, is one of astronomy’s biggest unsolved mysteries, says James Klimchuk, a solar physicist at the NASA Goddard Spaceflight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. For decades, scientists have been scratching their heads about why the corona, a hot plasma that extends millions of kilometres from the core, is so much hotter than the solar surface. “It’s like if you walk away from a campfire,” Klimchuk says, but instead of cooling down, you get warmer. “Why would that be?” They also have puzzled over what gives the corona its intricate structure (see ‘Crown jewels’).

‘CROWN’ JEWELS. Graphic labelling features of the Sun's corona.

Source: Nature adaptation from image provided by Nicolas Lefaudeux

Earth experiences total eclipses roughly once every 18 months. But their paths often cross remote areas, where few people can view them. The last time a total eclipse passed over North America was in 2017. Viewers along that eclipse’s ‘path of totality’ — in which the Moon completely blocks the solar disk — “wouldn’t have seen the same Sun as we’re seeing” during this one, says Marcel Corchado-Albelo, a solar physicist at the University of Colorado Boulder, who will participate in a public-outreach programme on 8 April aimed at marginalized communities in Texas. During the previous eclipse, the Sun was closer to its solar minimum.

The corona will “look much more complex” this time, Klimchuk says.

Simulating the Sun

A preview of how it might appear during the eclipse was released last month by Predictive Science, a research and product-development firm in San Diego, California. Staff members, including astrophysicist Cooper Downs, used real-time satellite data of the Sun’s surface magnetic fields and intensive supercomputer simulations to make the prediction. “The Sun is quite chaotic,” Downs says. So forecasting the corona’s appearance is as difficult as predicting cloud movement — the mention of which is a source of anxiety for eclipse chasers. Clouds could obscure the eclipse from the view of many on 8 April.

The firm’s prediction shows a corona composed of several spiky, spade-like structures called streamers, in which coronal plasma is tightly confined by magnetic field lines that leave the Sun’s surface but loop back into it. Streamers glow brighter than other parts of the corona because electrons in the denser plasma scatter sunlight. The prediction also shows coronal holes, darker regions between the streamers where magnetic field lines don’t loop back into the Sun but extend into interplanetary space. The holes can create strong gusts of solar wind — charged particles accelerated by magnetic fields — that cause geomagnetic storms threatening Earth-orbiting satellites.

By comparing the locations of streamers and holes in the actual eclipse and the simulation, the firm’s scientists will be able to validate and improve their model for future applications, including space-weather forecasting, Downs says.

Photo op

Because the Moon perfectly blocks the solar disk during an eclipse — owing to the cosmic coincidence that the Sun and Moon have similar sizes when viewed from Earth — solar physicists on the ground, including Shadia Habbal at the University of Hawaii in Honolulu, will be able to study the Sun’s chromosphere next week. This thin layer of plasma just above the solar surface is home to prominences, worm-like filaments of plasma protruding into the corona. “You see them very clearly during an eclipse,” Habbal says.

Sometimes, these prominences can snap explosively to form a coronal mass ejection. During one of these events, billions of tonnes of relatively cool (about 10,000 °C) solar plasma are expelled from the solar surface and are enveloped by the corona, whose temperature can exceed 1,000,000 °C. Habbal says that because of the solar maximum, viewers have a good chance of seeing a coronal mass ejection. Eclipses provide “the best opportunity to figure out how these plasmas co-exist and interact”, she adds.

To do this, Habbal is leading a team of 40 researchers armed with high-speed cameras and high-resolution sensors to capture tiny changes in the corona during the eclipse’s minutes of darkness. The scientists will be spread across three sites in Texas and Arkansas, to maximize the chance of a cloudless observation.

Flying high

One group that is not worried about clouds is the Airborne Coronal Emission Surveyor (ACES) team. These scientists will fly in a Gulfstream V jet above the clouds, at an altitude exceeding 13 kilometres. This will put them over a layer of water vapour in Earth’s atmosphere that absorbs infrared light and would interfere with their measurements of the corona. Chad Madsen, an astrophysicist at the Harvard–Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and an ACES participant, says the team is interested in studying one particularly long streamer in the Predictive Science forecast.

The team will measure infrared light emitted by the streamer to determine the strength of the magnetic fields in the part of the corona where it appears and the makeup of ions along various segments of the streamer, Madsen says. (Magnetic fields in the corona directly affect the infrared light emitted by plasma.)

Their flight will chase the Moon’s shadow along the path of totality through Texas, adding 90 more seconds of observation time to the maximum of 4 minutes and 30 seconds that viewers on the ground will get.

For many corona scientists, this eclipse isn’t their first, and probably won’t be their last. But each one offers a few minutes of magic. “There’s always an anticipation — you don’t know what it’s going to look like,” says Habbal, who will count this as her twentieth total eclipse. “Every time, it’s different.”

[ad_2]

Source Article Link

Categories
Life Style

Divisive Sun-dimming study at Harvard cancelled: what’s next?

[ad_1]

Last week, Harvard University researchers announced the cancellation of a high-profile solar geoengineering experiment, frustrating the project’s supporters. But advocates say that all is not lost, and that momentum for evaluating ways to artificially cool the planet is building internationally.

The study, called the Stratospheric Controlled Perturbation Experiment (SCoPEx), was to be the first to systematically inject particles into Earth’s upper atmosphere and then measure whether they could safely reflect sunlight back into space. Worried about the lacklustre progress by governments to curb greenhouse-gas emissions, advocates for SCoPEx say that such tests are necessary to determine whether solar geoengineering might one day provide emergency relief from the worst impacts of uncontrolled climate change.

But the project faced opposition from those concerned about unintended and potentially global consequences. Critics, including many academics, say that solar engineering is too risky and could reduce pressure on world leaders to eliminate greenhouse-gas emissions by offering a ‘plan B’.

“I’m saddened but not surprised to see it cancelled,” says Peter Frumhoff, a climatologist at Harvard in Cambridge, Massachusetts, who helped to organize a scientific advisory panel for the project. Harvard’s status as an elite research institution also fuelled fears that powerful Western players might unilaterally develop the technology, even though it could have global effects. Frumhoff says that what’s needed is some kind of international consensus on solar geoengineering. “No one seems to be able to agree at the moment about whether and how research should go forward in a way that would have legitimacy.”

Nature talks to scientists about the controversy, as well as about ongoing efforts to push forward with research.

Why did Harvard cancel the experiment?

The plan for SCoPEx was to launch a high-altitude balloon into the stratosphere, which extends some 10–50 kilometres above Earth’s surface. The balloon would release up to 2 kilograms of calcium carbonate particles — an ingredient in over-the-counter antacids — and then measure their dispersal, their interaction with other chemicals in the stratosphere and, ultimately, their ability to reflect sunlight.

The team never made it that far: the first launch, intended as an equipment test and set to take place at the Esrange Space Centre in northern Sweden, was called off in 2021 when environmentalists and local Indigenous groups announced their opposition. This was after the Harvard team had spent more than a year working with its advisory committee to address concerns about the project, which remained in limbo until last week’s announcement.

SCoPEx principal investigator Frank Keutsch, an atmospheric chemist at Harvard, did not respond to interview requests from Nature, but told MIT Technology Review that he wants to pursue “other innovative research avenues” in solar geoengineering. Another project leader, experimental physicist David Keith, told Nature the project struggled both with intense media attention and with how to address calls from the scientific advisory committee to broadly and formally engage with the public.

“We just didn’t see a way to square that circle and make it happen,” says Keith, who left Harvard last year to set up a new climate engineering programme at the University of Chicago in Illinois.

Is any research in solar geoengineering happening now?

Scientific organizations such as the UK Royal Society and the US National Academy of Sciences have long called for solar geoengineering research, and scientists have done extensive computer modelling. Some have even conducted field experiments to see whether they could brighten low-lying clouds to cool the local climate. But conducting experiments in the stratosphere, where injected particles invariably cross international borders, has proved challenging, as the Harvard case shows.

Some have moved forwards anyway, with little or no oversight.

An independent researcher in the United Kingdom, Andrew Lockley, says he launched a low-cost balloon that released 400 grams of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere in 2022 and is now trying to publish his results. A for-profit company called Make Sunsets, based in Box Elder, South Dakota, says it has also begun dispersing sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere by balloon. Backed by venture capitalists and criticized by scientists, the company is selling ‘cooling credits’ that allegedly offset one tonne of carbon-dioxide emissions for US$10 each, or $1 each with a monthly subscription.

The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), meanwhile, has begun gathering background data from the stratosphere to better understand — and detect — potential solar geoengineering efforts in future, both overt and covert. An initial aircraft survey above the Arctic last year showed1 that rocket launches and falling satellite debris have left particles of aluminium, copper and various exotic metals in the stratosphere with as-yet-unknown consequences.

Launched in 2020, the programme is funded to the tune of US$9.5 million this year, and at the request of the US Congress, NOAA is currently preparing a plan for future geoengineering research. For now, the goal is to gather the background data that scientists need to test their theoretical models, says David Fahey, an atmospheric scientist who is leading the effort at NOAA. “That is ultimately the way we’re going to evaluate the feasibility and the consequences.”

So what’s next?

It’s unclear, but scientists say that discussions about solar geoengineering aren’t going away.

Just last month, countries at the United Nations Environment Assembly failed to approve — for the second time in five years — a proposal calling for a formal assessment of the technology. That proposal might have hit a wall owing to differences of opinion about how to proceed, as well as concerns about legitimizing the technology, but it also showed that the conversation is expanding internationally, says Shuchi Talati, an environmental engineer who served on the SCoPEx advisory committee and, last year, founded the Alliance for Just Deliberation on Solar Geoengineering in Washington DC.

“For better or worse, momentum is growing in this space,” says Talati, whose organization is working to bring governments and civil-society organizations across low- and middle-income countries up to speed on the issue.

Also last month, the World Climate Research Programme, which helps to coordinate climate science globally, launched an initiative to promote research into climate interventions such as solar geoengineering. That work is just beginning, but the goal is to clarify priorities and lay out a global research agenda, says Daniele Visioni, a climate scientist at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, who is co-chairing the effort.

For his part, Keith is now working with the University of Chicago to build what might be the world’s largest academic initiative focused on climate engineering. The university is now looking to hire ten full-time faculty members to probe technologies ranging from solar geoengineering to carbon removal.

Going forwards, Keith says it’s appropriate to seek broad public input, particularly when there are potential harms that might arise from an experiment. He isn’t convinced, however, that such processes are necessary for small experiments that are not expected to impact the environment and that follow the usual rules and regulations.

“I don’t believe we need some kind of global process for those experiments,” Keith says.

[ad_2]

Source Article Link

Categories
Life Style

Landmark study links microplastics to serious health problems

[ad_1]

Plastics are just about everywhere — food packaging, tyres, clothes, water pipes. And they shed microscopic particles that end up in the environment and can be ingested or inhaled by people.

Now the first data of their kind show a link between these microplastics and human health. A study of more than 200 people undergoing surgery found that nearly 60% had microplastics or even smaller nanoplastics in a main artery1. Those who did were 4.5 times more likely to experience a heart attack, a stroke or death in the approximately 34 months after the surgery than were those whose arteries were plastic-free.

“This is a landmark trial,” says Robert Brook, a physician-scientist at Wayne State University in Detroit, Michigan, who studies the environmental effects on cardiovascular health and was not involved with the study. “This will be the launching pad for further studies across the world to corroborate, extend and delve into the degree of the risk that micro- and nanoplastics pose.”

But Brook, other researchers and the authors themselves caution that this study, published in The New England Journal of Medicine on 6 March, does not show that the tiny pieces caused poor health. Other factors that the researchers did not study, such as socio-economic status, could be driving ill health rather than the plastics themselves, they say.

Plastic planet

Scientists have found microplastics just about everywhere they’ve looked: in oceans; in shellfish; in breast milk; in drinking water; wafting in the air; and falling with rain.

Such contaminants are not only ubiquitous but also long-lasting, often requiring centuries to break down. As a result, cells responsible for removing waste products can’t readily degrade them, so microplastics accumulate in organisms.

In humans, they have been found in the blood and in organs such as the lungs and placenta. However, just because they accumulate doesn’t mean they cause harm. Scientists have been worried about the health effects of microplastics for around 20 years, but what those effects are has proved difficult to evaluate rigorously, says Philip Landrigan, a paediatrician and epidemiologist at Boston College in Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts.

Giuseppe Paolisso, an internal-medicine physician at the University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli in Caserta, Italy, and his colleagues knew that microplastics are attracted to fat molecules, so they were curious about whether the particles would build up in fatty deposits called plaques that can form on the lining of blood vessels. The team tracked 257 people undergoing a surgical procedure that reduces stroke risk by removing plaque from an artery in the neck.

Blood record

The researchers put the excised plaques under an electron microscope. They saw jagged blobs — evidence of microplastics — intermingled with cells and other waste products in samples from 150 of the participants. Chemical analyses revealed that the bulk of the particles were composed of either polyethylene, which is the most used plastic in the world and is often found in food packaging, shopping bags and medical tubing, or polyvinyl chloride, known more commonly as PVC or vinyl.

Microscope image showing various black and white shapes, with arrows pointing to two jagged blobs.

Microplastic particles (arrows) infiltrate a living immune cell called a macrophage that was removed from a fatty deposit in a study participant’s blood vessel.Credit: R. Marfella et al./N Engl J Med

On average, participants who had more microplastics in their plaque samples also had higher levels of biomarkers for inflammation, analyses revealed. That hints at how the particles could contribute to ill health, Brook says. If they help to trigger inflammation, they might boost the risk that a plaque will rupture, spilling fatty deposits that could clog blood vessels.

Compared to participants who didn’t have microplastics in their plaques, participants who did were younger; more likely to be male; more likely to smoke and more likely to have diabetes or cardiovascular disease. Because the study included only people who required surgery to reduce stroke risk, it is unknown whether the link holds true in a broader population.

Brook is curious about the 40% of participants who showed no evidence of microplastics in their plaques, especially given that it is nearly impossible to avoid plastics altogether. Study co-author Sanjay Rajagopalan, a cardiologist at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, says it’s possible that these participants behave differently or have different biological pathways for processing the plastics, but more research is needed.

Stalled progress

The study comes as diplomats try to hammer out a global treaty to eliminate plastic pollution. In 2022, 175 nations voted to create a legally binding international agreement, with a goal of finalizing it by the end of 2024.

Researchers have fought for more input into the process, noting that progress on the treaty has been too slow. The latest study is likely to light a fire under negotiators when they gather in Ottawa in April, says Landrigan, who co-authored a report2 that recommended a global cap on plastic production.

While Rajagopalan awaits further data on microplastics, his findings have already had an impact on his daily life. “I’ve had a much more conscious, intentional look at my own relationship with plastics,” he says. “I hope this study brings some introspection into how we, as a society, use petroleum-derived products to reshape the biosphere.”

[ad_2]

Source Article Link

Categories
Politics

New study reveals insight into which animals are most vulnerable to extinction due to climate change

[ad_1]

In a new study, researchers have used the fossil record to better understand what factors make animals more vulnerable to extinction from climate change. The results could help to identify species most at risk today from human-driven climate change. The findings have been published today in the journal Science.

Past climate change (often caused by natural changes in greenhouse gases due to volcanic activity) has been responsible for countless species’ extinctions during the history of life on Earth. But, to date, it has not been clear what factors cause species to be more or less resilient to such change, and how the magnitude of climate change affects extinction risk.

Led by researchers at the University of Oxford, this new study sought to answer this question by analysing the fossil record for marine invertebrates (such as sea urchins, snails, and shellfish) over the past 485 million years. Marine invertebrates have a rich and well-studied fossil record, making it possible to identify when, and potentially why, species become extinct.

Using over 290,000 fossil records covering more than 9,200 genera, the researchers collated a dataset of key traits that may affect resilience to extinction, including traits not studied in depth previously, such as preferred temperature. This trait information was integrated with climate simulation data to develop a model to understand which factors were most important in determining the risk of extinction during climate change.

Key findings:

  • The authors found that species exposed to greater climate change were more likely to become extinct. In particular, species that experienced temperature changes of 7°C or more across geological stages were significantly more vulnerable to extinction.
  • The authors also found that species occupying climatic extremes (for instance in polar regions) were disproportionately vulnerable to extinction, and animals that could only live in a narrow range of temperatures (especially ranges less than 15°C) were significantly more likely to become extinct.
  • However, geographic range size was the strongest predictor of extinction risk. Species with larger geographic ranges were significantly less likely to go extinct. Body size was also important, with smaller-bodied species more likely to become extinct.
  • All of the traits studied had a cumulative impact on extinction risk. For instance, species with both small geographic ranges and narrow thermal ranges were even more susceptible to extinction than species that had only one of these traits.

Cooper Malanoski (Department of Earth Sciences, University of Oxford), first author of the study, said: ‘Our study revealed that geographic range was the strongest predictor of extinction risk for marine invertebrates, but that the magnitude of climate change is also an important predictor of extinction, which has implications for biodiversity today in the face of climate change.’

With current human-driven climate change already pushing many species up to and beyond the brink of extinction, these results could help identify the animals that are most at risk, and inform strategies to protect them.

Lead author Professor Erin Saupe (Department of Earth Sciences, University of Oxford) said: ‘The evidence from the geological past suggests that global biodiversity faces a harrowing future, given projected climate change estimates. In particular, our model suggests that species with restricted thermal ranges of less than 15°C, living in the poles or tropics, are likely to be at the greatest risk of extinction. However, if the localized climate change is large enough, it could lead to significant extinction globally, potentially pushing us closer to a sixth mass extinction.’

According to the research team, future work should explore how climate change interacts with other potential drivers of extinction, such as ocean acidification and anoxia (where seawater becomes depleted of oxygen).

The study also involved researchers from the School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol. Professor Dan Lunt, from the University of Bristol, said: ‘This study shows that over the course of Earth’s history, the extinction risk of marine life has been inextricably linked to climate change. This should act as a stark warning to humanity as we recklessly continue to cause climate change ourselves through burning fossil fuels.’

[ad_2]

Source Article Link

Categories
Politics

COVID vaccines are safe for pregnant women and babies, study finds

[ad_1]

Landmark study contradicts misinformation about brain development and conditions like autism in children.

The COVID vaccine is safe to administer during pregnancy, reports UC San Francisco in an important finding on the safety of the vaccine in infants — despite widespread fear and misinformation.

The study, published in JAMA Pediatrics, is the first scientific inquiry into whether infants are at increased risk of neurodevelopmental impairments as a result of maternal vaccination.

The landmark study of more than 2,200 infants from across the country found that in utero exposure to the vaccine caused no abnormal delays when the infants were tested at 12 months and again at 18 months.

“This is a very reassuring finding — pregnant women have been facing unanswered questions around COVID vaccinations for several years,” said first author Eleni Jaswa, MD, MSc, a reproductive endocrinologist and fertility specialist at UCSF Health, noting the investigation started in April 2020. She is also an assistant professor in the UCSF Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences.

First meaningful evidence of maternal vaccination safety during pregnancy

Although pregnant women are considered at increased risk of severe illness with COVID-19, some chose not to get the COVID vaccine due to safety concerns around potential risks to their unborn children.

Some 34% of the participants in the study were vaccinated in the first trimester, about 45% in the second trimester, and nearly 21% in the third trimester. They were asked to complete a 30-item questionnaire assessing whether their infants performed expected milestones.

After adjusting for such factors as maternal age, race, ethnicity, education, income and maternal depression, the researchers found no difference in the risk of infant neurodevelopment at either 12 months or 18 months. They noted an increased risk of delay among male infants at 12 months but the difference was not observed at 18 months.

The study is ongoing.

“Understandably, there’s been concern about the potential impact of maternal vaccination on offspring,” said senior author Heather Huddleston, MD, a UCSF Health reproductive endocrinologist and director of the UCSF Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Clinic (PCOS).

“Despite early safety data as well as recommendations from physicians and health organizations, vaccine hesitancy is still preventing universal use,” she said. “To this day, misinformation continues to abound. People are concerned about such issues as brain development and conditions like autism in children. This is the first meaningful evidence into the safety of vaccination from the standpoint of early offspring neurodevelopment.”

Co-authors: All from UCSF, the paper’s co-authors are Marcelle Cedars, MD; Karla Lindquist, PhD; Somer Bishop, PhD; Young-Shin Kim, MD, MPH, PhD; Amy Kaing, MD; Mary Prahl, MD; Stephanie Gaw, MD, PhD; Jamie Corley, BS; Elena Hoskin, MS; Yoon Jae Cho, MD; and Elizabeth Rogers, MD.

[ad_2]

Source Article Link

Categories
Politics

Good news for coral reef restoration efforts: Study finds ‘full recovery’ of reef growth within four years

[ad_1]

While the majority of the world’s reefs are now under threat or even damaged potentially beyond repair, a new study reported in the journal Current Biology on March 8 offers some encouraging news: efforts to restore coral reefs not only increase coral cover, but they can also bring back important ecosystem functions, and surprisingly fast.

“We found that restored coral reefs can grow at the same speed as healthy coral reefs just four years after coral transplantation,” says Ines Lange of University of Exeter, UK. “This means that they provide lots of habitat for marine life and efficiently protect the adjacent island from wave energy and erosion.”

“The speed of recovery that we saw was incredible,” she says. “We did not expect a full recovery of reef framework production after only four years.”

The work by Lange and her international colleagues represents the first reef carbonate budget trajectories at any coral restoration sites. The study was conducted at the Mars Coral Reef Restoration Programme in South Sulawesi, Indonesia, one of the largest restoration projects in the world. The project relies on transplanting corals and adding substrate to restore reefs badly damaged by blast fishing 30 or 40 years ago. Without human intervention, those reefs had shown no signs of recovering due to the presence of loose coral rubble that prevents young coral larvae from surviving.

The restoration effort has added a continuous network of sand-coated steel structures to consolidate the rubble and offer a structure for transplanting coral fragments. The question was whether and how quickly such restored sites would recover. To find out, the researchers measured the carbonate budgets of 12 sites that had been restored at different times, up to four years ago.

“Corals constantly add calcium carbonate to the reef framework while some fishes and sea urchins erode it away, so calculating the overall carbonate budget basically tells you if the reef as a whole is growing or shrinking,” Lange says. “Positive reef growth is important to keep up with sea-level rise, protect coastlines from storms and erosion, and provide habitat for reef animals.”

They wanted to know how long it takes to bring back healthy reef growth and its associated functions. Their data show that rapid growth of transplanted corals supports the recovery of coral cover and carbonate production. In fact, just four years in, the net carbonate budget had tripled such that it matched that at healthy control sites.

There were some important differences, however. Because branched corals had been transplanted preferentially over other corals, the makeup of the restored reef communities differs. The researchers say those differences “may affect habitat provision for some marine species and resilience to future heatwaves, as branching corals are more sensitive to bleaching.”

While longer-term study is necessary to see what happens over time and under stress, the findings show that active management actions can help to boost the resilience of reefs and bring back important ecosystem functions that are critical for marine life and local communities in relatively short periods of time, according to the researchers. They’re hopeful that, over time, restored reefs will naturally recruit a more diverse mix of coral species. However, they note that what will happen in any given location around the world will depend on many factors, including environmental conditions and restoration techniques.

“As is so often the case, there is no one-size-fits-all solution, but we hope that this positive example can be used as inspiration for other reef restoration projects around the world,” Lange says.

“These results give us the encouragement that if we can rapidly reduce emissions and stabilize the climate, we have effective tools to help regrow functioning coral reefs,” says Tim Lamont, a study co-author at the Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, UK.

[ad_2]

Source Article Link

Categories
News

Exploring the Fury: NASA and Rocket Lab’s Mission to Unravel Tropical Storm Secrets

NASA and Rocket Lab Join Forces to Study Tropical Storm Systems with Satellite Constellation

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), in collaboration with Rocket Lab, has launched a cutting-edge satellite constellation aimed at studying tropical storm systems. This joint effort is part of ongoing research to better understand and predict the behavior of these powerful and often destructive weather phenomena.

Tropical storms, such as hurricanes and typhoons, pose significant risks to coastal regions around the world. Their rapid intensification and unpredictable trajectories make them a challenging subject for study. By gaining deeper insights into the complex dynamics of these storms, scientists hope to enhance forecasting capabilities and improve early warning systems, ultimately helping to mitigate the impact on vulnerable populations.

Collaboration between NASA and Rocket Lab Aims to Unravel Mysteries of Tropical Storms

The satellite constellation, consisting of multiple small satellites deployed into low Earth orbit, will enable researchers to gather comprehensive data on tropical storm systems. Equipped with advanced remote sensing instruments, these satellites will capture high-resolution imagery, measure atmospheric conditions, and collect various meteorological data points. The constellation’s distributed nature allows for a more comprehensive view of storm systems, providing a wealth of information that was previously difficult to obtain.

Rocket Lab, a private aerospace company specializing in small satellite launches, has played a crucial role in this ambitious endeavor. Leveraging their Electron launch vehicle, Rocket Lab has successfully deployed several satellites into orbit, contributing to the growing constellation. The company’s proven track record in delivering small payloads to space with precision and efficiency has made them an ideal partner for NASA in this scientific mission.

NASA’s involvement in this project brings its extensive expertise in Earth observation and atmospheric research. The agency has a long history of studying weather patterns and climatic changes, and its contributions to the field of meteorology are widely recognized. By collaborating with Rocket Lab, NASA is able to accelerate the pace of research and leverage the latest advancements in satellite technology to unravel the mysteries of tropical storm systems.

The data collected by the satellite constellation will be invaluable in refining existing models and developing new algorithms to improve storm prediction accuracy. Researchers will be able to analyze the intricate interactions between oceanic and atmospheric conditions, gain insights into storm intensification processes, and identify factors that contribute to the formation and dissipation of tropical storms. Ultimately, this enhanced understanding will aid in providing more accurate forecasts, early warnings, and evacuation plans for at-risk communities.

The joint efforts of NASA and Rocket Lab represent a significant step forward in the study of tropical storm systems. By harnessing the power of small satellites and cutting-edge technology, scientists are poised to unlock valuable insights into these complex weather phenomena. The knowledge gained from this research will not only contribute to the field of meteorology but also serve as a crucial resource in protecting lives and property from the devastating impacts of tropical storms.

Collaboration between NASA and Rocket Lab Aims to Unravel Mysteries of Tropical Storms

Tropical storms have long captivated the attention of scientists and the public alike due to their immense power and potential for devastation. The collaboration between NASA and Rocket Lab marks a significant milestone in the ongoing efforts to unravel the mysteries surrounding these formidable weather systems.

NASA, renowned for its pioneering work in space exploration and Earth observation, brings a wealth of knowledge and resources to this partnership. With its extensive satellite fleet and ground-based research capabilities, the agency has been at the forefront of studying weather patterns and climate dynamics. By teaming up with Rocket Lab, a leader in small satellite launches, NASA gains access to efficient and cost-effective deployment capabilities, allowing for a more comprehensive study of tropical storm systems.

Rocket Lab’s Electron launch vehicle, known for its flexibility and reliability, has been instrumental in placing multiple small satellites into orbit. This constellation of satellites, strategically positioned in low Earth orbit, provides a unique vantage point for observing tropical storms from various angles and altitudes. The distributed nature of the constellation allows for continuous monitoring and data collection, even in hard-to-reach regions where traditional instruments are limited.

The advanced remote sensing instruments onboard these small satellites enable researchers to capture high-resolution imagery, measure key atmospheric parameters, and monitor various aspects of tropical storm systems. By combining these observations with data from ground-based weather stations and other satellite platforms, scientists can piece together a more comprehensive picture of the complex processes at play during the formation, intensification, and dissipation of tropical storms.

One of the primary goals of this collaboration is to improve storm prediction and forecasting capabilities. Accurate and timely predictions can save lives and help communities prepare for the impacts of tropical storms. By analyzing the vast amount of data collected by the satellite constellation, scientists can refine existing models and algorithms, leading to more precise forecasts. This, in turn, allows for better planning of evacuation procedures, resource allocation, and emergency response strategies.

Additionally, the satellite constellation’s data will contribute to our understanding of the factors influencing the intensity and behavior of tropical storms. The intricate interactions between oceanic and atmospheric conditions play a crucial role in the development of these weather systems. By studying these interactions in greater detail, researchers can identify patterns and drivers of storm intensification, providing valuable insights for future studies and potential mitigation strategies.

The collaboration between NASA and Rocket Lab holds promise for scientific breakthroughs that will not only benefit our understanding of tropical storms but also inform our understanding of weather patterns and climate dynamics as a whole. The knowledge gained from this partnership has the potential to enhance our ability to respond to extreme weather events, improve disaster preparedness, and build more resilient communities in the face of climate change.

As the satellite constellation continues to collect data and scientists delve deeper into the mysteries of tropical storm systems, the collaboration between NASA and Rocket Lab stands as a testament to the power of innovation and cooperation in pushing the boundaries of scientific exploration. Through their joint efforts, these organizations are poised to revolutionize our understanding of tropical storms, making significant strides towards a safer and more informed future for communities vulnerable to these natural phenomena.