SorellaLaBefana
SorellaLaBefana's JournalWater Photo Close Up Contest Winners: Some Amazing Images
“We asked photographers to show us work on a Water theme. Our callout was answered with images of seahorses swimming through kelp, flowers bejeweled with rain, and insects drying out their wings before taking flight, among so many other things. As usual, looking at all the entries was both educational and inspiring,” noted Tracy Calder, co-founder of CUPOTY…
https://www.iflscience.com/a-newts-midnight-feast-wins-close-up-photographer-of-the-year-water-challenge-73917
My favourite at first was the second place winner which was incredibly colorful and surrealistic.
When I read the description of how the image was made I was disappointed by the manipulation. I don’t even like photos where mist has been sprayed on subjects to make them appear dew covered, much less imbedded in a block of ice and shot on a light table.
The damselfly (above) did it for me: Simplicity of composition, sharp focus and no manipulation of the subject.
I also enjoyed the apparently dew covered images. Yet, am always concerned that such subjects have been ‘enhanced’ as mentioned above. The finalist ‘Long Over Dew’ is striking but wonder not only about the ‘dew’ but if the insect has been put in a refrigerator by the photographer—I hope not, yet this is not an uncommon practice.
This all points out that long before AI generated or even photoshopped images a picture might not be what it seems.
Tiny (Cow-Sized) Titanosaur Discovered in Argentina
Elsewhere in Argentina, some of the largest dinosaurs ever to roam the Earth have been found, including the colossal lump that was Patagotitan mayorum. At the other end of the scale sits Titanomachya at around 7 tons in weight and – as Riley Black wrote for National Geographic – about the size of a massive cow, making it about 10 times smaller than Patagotitan…
https://www.iflscience.com/anyone-for-a-mini-titanosaur-new-species-is-one-of-the-smallest-ever-found-73817
Though, at 7 tons, would be a pretty Big Cow.
Just found this so charming, whimsical and uplifting on a day filled with dire news that I hope it will lift someone else’s spirits as well.
Especially since they caught it on video! 😊
Meanwhile, in *Other* News: Critical Ocean Current Likely in Collapse from Our Warming Planet
The formation of sea ice in the North Atlantic drives the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, and its depletion may be why it is weakening.
Ocean currents move quantities of water that make the world’s largest rivers seem small by comparison. In the process, they redistribute heat, as well as helping oxygenate deeper waters. The factors causing these currents vary, with physical processes such as the Coriolis force having an important influence. AMOC, however, is primarily the result of salty water left behind when sea ice forms sinking to the depths, leaving space for tropical waters to flow in.
Many climate models suggest that as melting ice from Greenland floods the North Atlantic with cold, but very fresh, water, it will sit above more salty water instead of sinking. Without an impulse to the depths, water will stop moving south in the deep ocean, and the Gulf Stream will flow more weakly. However, the Atlantic is a large place, and tracking the movements of this much water is hard, particularly since the data gets patchier the further back you go. Measurement efforts consistently show AMOC is weakening, but disagree on how much…
The possibility of AMOC’s collapse attracted public attention when it was the centerpiece of the Hollywood blockbuster The Day After Tomorrow. Like most disaster films it took something real and exaggerated it to ridiculous proportions. “Of course, most climate scientists do not share these Hollywood fantasies, and no one inside scientific communities believes anything remotely similar can happen,” Mishonov said. "However, most do believe that substantial slowing of AMOC might result in significant climate change that cannot be foreseen and predicted. Therefore, increased interest in AMOC functionality is fully warranted."…
https://www.iflscience.com/one-of-the-worlds-most-important-ocean-currents-really-is-slowing-down-73554
The Open Access (free to read) study the above is based on is “Revisiting the multidecadal variability of North Atlantic Ocean circulation and climate” in the journal Frontiers in Marine Science
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2024.1345426/full
Neither the Moon (nor Mars) can be Planet-B…
T/F: Males Are Larger Than Females
Males Are Larger Than Females, Or Are They? New Data Challenges 100 Years Of Bias
Think of a lion; think of a gorilla; think of an otter. In your head, are the males bigger than the females? Well, a new study is set to challenge over 100 years of bias in this area of research. By looking at over 400 mammal species, the team found some surprising results – in most cases, the males of the species are not bigger than the females...
Back in the 1970s, mammologist Katherine Ralls found that there were many species in which there was little sexual size dimorphism (SSD), especially within the larger groups of mammals. However, her research was overlooked [ed: surprise??] and overpowered by the idea that the males of most mammalian orders are bigger than the females...
They [Nature study (vide infra)] suggest that the idea that males are larger than females has persisted for so long because a lot of early zoology work was based on male competition for mates. The team also suggest that their results could change again as more data is collected, and suggest more work be carried out in female biology across a wide range of mammalian species.
https://www.iflscience.com/males-are-larger-than-females-or-are-they-new-data-challenges-100-years-of-bias-73347
The above is from a popular press discussion of the non-paywalled [free access] Nature study:
"New estimates indicate that males are not larger than females in most mammal species"
Abstract
Sexual size dimorphism has motivated a large body of research on mammalian mating strategies and sexual selection. Despite some contrary evidence, the narrative that larger males are the norm in mammals—upheld since Darwin’s Descent of Man—still dominates today, supported by meta-analyses that use coarse measures of dimorphism and taxonomically-biased sampling. With newly-available datasets and primary sources reporting sex-segregated means and variances in adult body mass, we estimate statistically-determined rates of sexual size dimorphism in mammals, sampling taxa by their species richness at the family level. Our analyses of wild, non-provisioned populations representing >400 species indicate that although males tend to be larger than females when dimorphism occurs, males are not larger in most mammal species, suggesting a need to revisit other assumptions in sexual selection research.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-45739-5
When one's basic understanding of what the facts are is incorrect, it is extremely unlikely that any conclusions drawn will be correct. There is so much to be re-learned, re-imagined, re-thought.
--------- nb: XP Women
T/F: Males Are Larger Than Females
Males Are Larger Than Females, Or Are They? New Data Challenges 100 Years Of Bias
Think of a lion; think of a gorilla; think of an otter. In your head, are the males bigger than the females? Well, a new study is set to challenge over 100 years of bias in this area of research. By looking at over 400 mammal species, the team found some surprising results – in most cases, the males of the species are not bigger than the females...
Back in the 1970s, mammologist Katherine Ralls found that there were many species in which there was little sexual size dimorphism (SSD), especially within the larger groups of mammals. However, her research was overlooked [ed: surprise??] and overpowered by the idea that the males of most mammalian orders are bigger than the females...
They [Nature study (vide infra)] suggest that the idea that males are larger than females has persisted for so long because a lot of early zoology work was based on male competition for mates. The team also suggest that their results could change again as more data is collected, and suggest more work be carried out in female biology across a wide range of mammalian species.
https://www.iflscience.com/males-are-larger-than-females-or-are-they-new-data-challenges-100-years-of-bias-73347
The above is from a popular press discussion of the non-paywalled [free access] Nature study:
"New estimates indicate that males are not larger than females in most mammal species"
Abstract
Sexual size dimorphism has motivated a large body of research on mammalian mating strategies and sexual selection. Despite some contrary evidence, the narrative that larger males are the norm in mammals—upheld since Darwin’s Descent of Man—still dominates today, supported by meta-analyses that use coarse measures of dimorphism and taxonomically-biased sampling. With newly-available datasets and primary sources reporting sex-segregated means and variances in adult body mass, we estimate statistically-determined rates of sexual size dimorphism in mammals, sampling taxa by their species richness at the family level. Our analyses of wild, non-provisioned populations representing >400 species indicate that although males tend to be larger than females when dimorphism occurs, males are not larger in most mammal species, suggesting a need to revisit other assumptions in sexual selection research.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-45739-5
When one's basic understanding of what the facts are is incorrect, it is extremely unlikely that any conclusions drawn will be correct. There is so much to be re-learned, re-imagined, re-thought.
Yes, Virginia, "Ultra-processed foods damage health and shorten life"
As found by the British Medical Journal study referenced in this BMJ Editorial
The quality of the evidence was strong for all cause mortality, obesity, and type 2 diabetes (this evidence was rated as of moderate quality using the GRADE system, which initially considers all observational studies as low quality evidence). Overall, the authors found that diets high in ultra-processed food may be harmful to most—perhaps all—body systems.
Ultra-processed foods are not merely modified foods. As defined by the Nova classification, they are formulations of often chemically manipulated cheap ingredients such as modified starches, sugars, oils, fats, and protein isolates, with little if any whole food added, made palatable and attractive by using combinations of flavours, colours, emulsifiers, thickeners, and other additives. No reason exists to believe that humans can fully adapt to these products. The body may react to them as useless or harmful, so its systems may become impaired or damaged, depending on their vulnerability and the amount of ultra-processed food consumed.
https://www.bmj.com/content/384/bmj.q439
This important article is available non-paywalled (free) here:
https://www.bmj.com/content/384/bmj-2023-077310
Truly Good News ! (if other studies confirm) for People with Crohn's Disease !!
A one-year study of ~400 people newly diagnosed with Crohn’s bowel disease found that the immediate administration of an antibody (infliximab) targeting proteins which contribute to gut inflammation significantly improved outcomes.
In the past, because of its cost and feared side-effects, infliximab has only been used after the usual treatments of dietary changes, older immunosuppressants (such as steroids) have failed.
The disease can be life-threatening, not simply profoundly debilitating. Extensive and repeated abdominal surgeries are often required.
In this study 80% of those receiving infliximab at the time of initial diagnosis had symptom control compared to 15% in the standard treatment group. Just 0.5% in the immediate treatment group required surgery compared to 4.5% in the standard group.
These findings suggest early use of infliximab greatly improves patient lives and reduces the need for costly procedures later on.
Here is a link to the original non-paywalled article in Lancet
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langas/article/PIIS2468-1253(24)00034-7/fulltext
And one to a more readable summary in New Scientist
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2418516-early-drug-treatment-leads-to-better-outcomes-for-crohns-disease/
I have some preliminary thoughts about the study, which, if confirmed, will truly change the therapeutic paradigm for Crohn’s (and possibly other diseases).
First is that it was an open label study—everyone knew who was getting which treatment. Second, it (I believe) is an industry sponsored trail—this is not prima facia evidence of a biased study; however, historically, industry sponsored studies more often show positive results than do those with other funding sources. Given the cost of the study drug, it is unlikely that such a preliminary study would have had any chance of finding any other source of funding. Lastly, given that Crohn's is a lifelong condition, a one-year study is pretty short.
Most fascinating to me (and which gives me confidence in the study—as well as in science in general) is that the study was actually designed to look at something else! Sadly, being a serendipitous finding also somewhat undermines the marvelous results as the study was not designed to look at this particular hypothesis.
There is a growing awareness in medical science that our traditional ways of looking at disease by organ systems may be outdated. This has first become evident in cancer—where more focus is being changed to the underlying pathobiology of a cancer as opposed to what organ it initially manifests in.
In the case of the current study, the hypothesis being tested was that the targeting of particular blood biomarkers in people with Crohn’s could be used to guide therapy. This turned out to not be true! Instead, the finding that early infliximab was extraordinarily effective turned up.
Yet, it is worth recalling that many scientific discoveries have been made when looking for something else entirely—something which, being unknown, cannot be put into a grant proposal!
---
X-post Good News and Health
Good News (if other studies confirm) for People with Crohn's Disease !
A one-year study of ~400 people newly diagnosed with Crohn’s bowel disease found that the immediate administration of an antibody (infliximab) targeting proteins which contribute to gut inflammation significantly improved outcomes.
In the past, because of its cost and feared side-effects, infliximab has only been used after the usual treatments of dietary changes, older immunosuppressants (such as steroids) have failed.
The disease can be life-threatening, not simply profoundly debilitating. Extensive and repeated abdominal surgeries are often required.
In this study 80% of those receiving infliximab at the time of initial diagnosis had symptom control compared to 15% in the standard treatment group. Just 0.5% in the immediate treatment group required surgery compared to 4.5% in the standard group.
These findings suggest early use of infliximab greatly improves patient lives and reduces the need for costly procedures later on.
Here is a link to the original non-paywalled article in Lancet
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langas/article/PIIS2468-1253(24)00034-7/fulltext
And one to a more readable summary in New Scientist
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2418516-early-drug-treatment-leads-to-better-outcomes-for-crohns-disease/
I have some preliminary thoughts about the study, which, if confirmed, will truly change the therapeutic paradigm for Crohn’s (and possibly other diseases).
First is that it was an open label study—everyone knew who was getting which treatment. Second, it (I believe) is an industry sponsored trail—this is not prima facia evidence of a biased study; however, historically, industry sponsored studies more often show positive results than do those with other funding sources. Given the cost of the study drug, it is unlikely that such a preliminary study would have had any chance of finding any other source of funding. Lastly, given that Crohn's is a lifelong condition, a one-year study is pretty short.
Most fascinating to me (and which gives me confidence in the study—as well as in science in general) is that the study was actually designed to look at something else! Sadly, being a serendipitous finding also somewhat undermines the marvelous results as the study was not designed to look at this particular hypothesis.
There is a growing awareness in medical science that our traditional ways of looking at disease by organ systems may be outdated. This has first become evident in cancer—where more focus is being changed to the underlying pathobiology of a cancer as opposed to what organ it initially manifests in.
In the case of the current study, the hypothesis being tested was that the targeting of particular blood biomarkers in people with Crohn’s could be used to guide therapy. This turned out to not be true! Instead, the finding that early infliximab was extraordinarily effective turned up.
Yet, it is worth recalling that many scientific discoveries have been made when looking for something else entirely—something which, being unknown, cannot be put into a grant proposal!
---
X-post Good News and Health
Misogyny and racial bias routinely putting patients at risk in England, warns NHS safety chief
Dr Henrietta Hughes was appointed in 2022 in response to a series of scandals in women’s health. She outlined a “huge landscape” of biases in need of levelling, citing examples ranging from neonatal assessment tools and pulse oximeters that work less well for darker skin tones to heart valves, mesh implants and replacement hip joints that were not designed with female patients in mind.
Hughes said: “I don’t see this as blaming individual healthcare professionals – doctors and nurses – for getting it wrong. It’s pervasive in the systems we have – the training, the experience, the resources.
“Anatomy books are very narrow in their focus. Even the resuscitation models are of pale males – we don’t have female resuscitation models, we don’t have them in darker skin tones. This is deeply ingrained in the way that we assess and listen to patients…”
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/feb/04/misogyny-and-racial-bias-routinely-putting-patients-at-risk-in-england-warns-nhs-safety-chief
This gives increasing evidence that more and more people are (dare I say it) waking up to the systemic bias favouring of (straight) white males in many areas of healthcare systems in white-majority countries worldwide: Women and non-whites just don’t exist.
A very good discussion of how women are ignored—even in more egalitarian countries—is the book “Invisible Women: Data Bias in a World Designed for Men.” One of the stark points I recall from this work is that the most dangerous seat for a woman in a car is (for a wide variety of issues ranging from initial design to safety testing) the driver’s seat.
Lesley the Bird Nerd has Retired from YT Bird Nerding
We’ve followed her for years. Learned ever so much. Have marveled at her ability to hold herself and her cameras so steady when hand feeding wild birds in even terrible Canadian winter weather.
One of the many (perhaps most immediately important thing) we learned from her is of the danger to birds of feeding them bread. Few people have NOT done this, even fewer know of the damage it can cause.
Lesley doesn’t mention this at all, but the same issues with bread which cause problems for birds can also cause problems for humans if we eat too much of it https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/295235
She has made so many videos over the years. Some of them heartrending, many wonderfully inspirational. She has been a light for the world.
Here are a couple of topical videos which discuss the problems birds face in the dark of Winter, and how one can best help them to make it through to the light of Spring.
Lesley is apparently a very private person. I've learned a fair bit about her; however, since she has chosen not to share, nor will I. Will just say she’s a Newfie, living on the west coast of that beautiful island and someone who has touched so many people around this old world.
She has a webstore, which has some nice merch and which offers a way to give back to her
https://www.bonfire.com/store/lesleythebirdnerd/
Tempus fugit, and, as the Buddha taught: “All things which are of the nature to have a beginning are of the nature to have an ending”
Thank you Lesley
============
Cross positing here from Lounge at suggestion of multigraincracker
Profile Information
Member since: Tue Dec 24, 2013, 09:33 AMNumber of posts: 144