Mercury is accumulating in deep-ocean trenches

Following mercury around the environment isn't easy.

Although pollution controls have significantly reduced the mercury content of coal-fired plant emissions, the latest Global Mercury Assessment still estimates that there has been a 20 percent increase in anthropogenic mercury emissions between 2010 and 2015. A new study provides some insight into where all that mercury might end up: there are unprecedented levels of mercury in up-to-now-unmeasured deep-ocean trenches.

 

The WHO categorizes mercury as one of the top 10 chemicals of major health concern, and as of 2020, over 120 countries have been working together to reduce environmental mercury through the 2017 Minamata Convention on Mercury. In its elemental and mono-methylated form (methylmercury), mercury is a potent neurotoxin. Methylmercury in particular biomagnifies, which means it increases in concentration as it goes up the marine food chain. That has prompted lots of warnings about the consumption of fish and seafood.

 

This latest report is the first to measure mercury-accumulation rates in sediment cores from some of the deepest parts of the ocean—the hadal zones (>6 km depth). While the deep ocean is considered one of the most important, and relatively safest, places for mercury to end up, the rates of accumulation were up to 56 times greater than prior estimates. The highest measured concentrations were also nearly as high as some of the most contaminated bodies of water on the planet—a jarring finding given that these locations (the Atacama and Kermadec trenches) aren't in the vicinity of any known mercury sources.

 

This finding shows that a lot is still left to understand about how much mercury is in the environment, where it's going, and how it's getting there.

Complicated chemistry

Tracking where mercury is and what it's doing in the environment is complicated by the many physical and chemical transformations that are possible—not all of which are well understood. Elemental and oxidized mercury can exist as vapors, and this allows it to move thousands of miles away from its origin. All the while, mercury undergoes chemical transformations in the atmosphere, and once it settles out of the air, conditions on land and in water make additional changes possible, including bacterial conversion to methylmercury.

 

Natural sources of mercury, such as volcanic eruptions and rock weathering, have always existed. But according to the latest estimates for the UN Environment Programme, human activities have caused a 450 percent increase in atmospheric mercury compared to natural levels. While the biggest mercury spikes occurred largely due to gold and silver mining between 1520 and 1920, global emissions are still on the rise.

 

Fossil fuels account for about one-quarter of this increase, but lately the leading contributor has again been artisanal and small-scale gold mining. This kind of extraction has released roughly 1,220 tons of mercury in 2015 alone (nearly 40 percent of that year's global total).

 

Another major concern about mercury is that it can reside in the environment for centuries before it is naturally buried on land or in ocean sediment. Climate disturbances such as rising temperatures and receding lakes and oceans may also cause remobilization out of these sinks and back into the atmosphere.

Changes over time

Available evidence indicates that the oceans are the world's principle sinks for anthropogenic mercury. Researchers have extensive measurements from the water column, shallower sediments, and, of course, aquatic life. But acquiring a sediment core from the bottom of a trench has been, and continues to be, a significant logistical and financial challenge.

 

"It's really technologically remarkable what the Danish and German researchers who retrieved the samples were able to do," says Peter Outridge, corresponding author for the current study, as well as lead author of the United Nations' Global Mercury Assessment. "Think about trying to try to take a sediment core at the end of a 7- or 8-kilometer-long cable from a ship that's bobbing around on the ocean—it takes many hours to send the sampler down and bring it back up, and then you have to hope that there's actually a sample there and that you didn't hit a boulder or something."

 

These sediment cores give the first direct evidence of how deep-ocean mercury concentrations have been changing over the last 60-190 years (i.e., the flux). The results show rates between 6 and 56 times greater than what researchers had inferred from measurements in other parts of the ocean. The concentrations were also the highest recorded at any site that was not in the area of a known source, such as an underwater volcano or industrial contamination.

 

"The concentrations we found—particularly the maximum concentrations in the Atacama trench off Chile—are almost as high as you would see in the Mediterranean Sea or the St. Lawrence Gulf in Canada, which are areas that are actually contaminated long-term by industrial releases of mercury," says Outridge. "To find those sorts of concentrations in a remote part of the ocean—that was a surprise—and the accumulation rates were at least an order of magnitude higher than the averages that have been calculated in the past from water column measurements."

Tracking down the origins

This research only gives data from two of the more than 40 deep-ocean trenches, so additional measurements from other trenches are needed for a more complete understanding of how widespread the accumulation is. Tracing where all the mercury comes from is currently a challenge, but recent research has shown that monitoring different isotope ratios of mercury can be very effective for tracking its movements. While such evidence isn't available yet, it's also not a complete surprise that the oceans' mercury might end up in trenches.

 

"I think that we would expect concentrations to increase in the sediment as you go from coastal areas into the deep ocean," says Outridge. "If you take lakes as an analogy, if you go from the edge of the lake out to the deepest part of the lake, then the concentration does increase, of mercury and other elements. I think what's going on here is that we're seeing a particle filtering effect, where the finest sediment makes it to the deepest part of the ocean and the coarsest sediment settles out in the coastal areas."

 

With relatively little life down there and low chances of the mercury moving out before it's buried by plate tectonics, we should be somewhat reassured that mercury might be concentrating in these trenches. But the potential damage en route is still significant, and it's in everyone's interest to keep working to minimize mercury use as much as possible.

 

Scientific Reports, 2021. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-90459-1

 

K.E.D. Coan is a freelance journalist covering climate and environment stories at Ars Technica. She has a PhD in chemistry and chemical biology.

Mercury is accumulating in deep-ocean trenches

The Challenge of Covid-19 Vaccines for the Immunosuppressed (may require free registration)

NEW YORK (AP) — A new analysis of blood samples from 24,000 Americans taken early last year is the latest and largest study to suggest that the new coronavirus popped up in the U.S. in December 2019 — weeks before cases were first recognized by health officials.

The analysis is not definitive, and some experts remain skeptical, but federal health officials are increasingly accepting a timeline in which small numbers of COVID-19 infections may have occurred in the U.S. before the world ever became aware of a dangerous new virus erupting in China.

“The studies are pretty consistent,” said Natalie Thornburg of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“There was probably very rare and sporadic cases here earlier than we were aware of. But it was not widespread and didn’t become widespread until late February,” said Thornburg, principal investigator of the CDC’s respiratory virus immunology team.

Such results underscore the need for countries to work together and identify newly emerging viruses as quickly and collaboratively as possible, she added.

The pandemic coronavirus emerged in Wuhan, China in late 2019. Officially, the first U.S. infection to be identified was a traveler — a Washington state man who returned from Wuhan on Jan. 15 and sought help at a clinic on Jan. 19.

CDC officials initially said the spark that started the U.S. outbreak arrived during a three-week window from mid-January to early February. But research since then — including some done by the CDC — has suggested a small number of infections occurred earlier.

A CDC-led study published in December 2020 that analyzed 7,000 samples from American Red Cross blood donations suggested the virus infected some Americans as early as the middle of December 2019.

The latest study, published Tuesday online by the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases, is by a team including researchers at the National Institutes of Health. They analyzed blood samples from more than 24,000 people across the country, collected in the first three months of 2020 as part of a long-term study called “All Of Us” that seeks to track 1 million Americans over years to study health.

Like the CDC study, these researchers looked for antibodies in the blood that are taken as evidence of coronavirus infection, and can be detected as early as two weeks after a person is first infected.

The researchers say seven study participants — three from Illinois, and one each from Massachusetts, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin — were infected earlier than any COVID-19 case was originally reported in those states.

One of the Illinois cases was infected as early as Christmas Eve, said Keri Althoff, an associate professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and the study’s lead author.

It can be difficult to distinguish antibodies that neutralize SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, from antibodies that fight other coronaviruses, including some that cause the common cold. Researchers in both the NIH and CDC studies used multiple types of tests to minimize false positive results, but some experts say it still is possible their 2019 positives were infections by other coronaviruses and not the pandemic strain.

“While it is entirely plausible that the virus was introduced into the United States much earlier than is usually appreciated, it does not mean that this is necessarily strong enough evidence to change how we’re thinking about this,” said William Hanage, a Harvard University expert on disease dynamics.

The NIH researchers have not followed up with study participants yet to see if any had traveled out of the U.S. prior to their infection. But they found it noteworthy that the seven did not live in or near New York City or Seattle, where the first wave of U.S. cases were concentrated.

“The question is how did, and where did, the virus take seed,” Althoff said. The new study indicates “it probably seeded in multiple places in our country,” she added.

Source

• Amazon burns through hourly employees, a major New York Times investigation found.

• Employee churn is so high that some Amazon execs are reportedly worried about running out of people.

• The company has been on a hiring spree to keep up with increased shopping during the pandemic.

• Visit the Business section of Insider for more stories.

Amazon has been hiring hundreds of thousands of workers for roles in its warehouses, which it calls fulfillment centers, but those employees have been quitting almost as fast as they can be hired, according to a huge report from The New York Times published on Tuesday.

Many of the over 350,000 workers Amazon hired from July to October stayed with the company "just days or weeks," the report said.

Hourly employees had a turnover rate of about 150% every year, data reviewed by The Times indicated. That led some Amazon executives to worry about running out of hirable employees in the US, the report said.

Amazon went on an extended hiring spree in 2020 as it attempted to keep up with a massive spike in demand during coronavirus lockdowns. As Americans increasingly turned to Amazon for things like toiletries and groceries, the company repeatedly touted major hiring pushes.

By May 2021, Amazon was even offering $1,000 signing bonuses to new employees — partially a symptom of hiring issues that employers are facing in a variety of industries, and potentially of Amazon's remarkably high turnover rate.

One former Amazon manager who oversaw human-resources efforts focused on warehouse workers compared the situation with worker churn at Amazon warehouses to the use of fossil fuels. "We keep using them, even though we know we're slowly cooking ourselves," he told The Times.

Amazon representatives didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

Source

We probably cannot slow the rate at which we get older because of biological constraints, an unprecedented study of lifespan statistics in human and non-human primates has confirmed.

The study set out to test the 'invariant rate of aging' hypothesis, which says that a species has a relatively fixed rate of aging from adulthood. An international collaboration of scientists from 14 countries, including José Manuel Aburto from Oxford's Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science, analyzed age-specific birth and death data spanning centuries and continents. Led by Fernando Colchero, University of Southern Denmark and Susan Alberts, Duke University, North Carolina, the study was a huge endeavor requiring monitoring wild populations of primates over several decades.

Jose Manuel Aburto says, "Our findings support the theory that, rather than slowing down death, more people are living much longer due to a reduction in mortality at younger ages. We compared birth and death data from humans and non-human primates and found this general pattern of mortality was the same in all of them. This suggests that biological, rather than environmental factors, ultimately control longevity.

"The statistics confirmed that individuals live longer as health and living conditions improve, which leads to increasing longevity across an entire population. Nevertheless, a steep rise in death rates, as years advance into old age, is clear to see in all species.

"The debate over how long we can live has divided the academic community for decades. Some scholars argue human lifespan has no limit, while others say the opposite. But what has been missing is research comparing lifespans of multiple animal populations with humans, to work out what is driving mortality. Our study plugs that gap. This extraordinarily diverse collection of data enabled us to compare mortality differences both within and between species."

The team analyzed data from primates, our closest genetic relatives, and therefore most likely to shed light on our biology. The research team analyzed information from 30 primate species, 17 in the wild and 13 in zoos, including gorillas, baboons, chimpanzees and guenons. And it examined birth and death records from nine diverse human populations in 17th to 20th century Europe, the Caribbean and Ukraine, and two hunter gatherer groups between 1900 and 2000.

All the datasets examined by the team revealed the same general pattern of mortality: A high risk of death in infancy that rapidly declines in the immature and teenage years, remains low until early adulthood, and then continually rises in advancing age.

José Manuel Aburto says, "Our findings confirm that, in historical populations, life expectancy was low because many people died young. But as medical, social, and environmental improvements continued, life expectancy increased. More and more people get to live much longer now. However, the trajectory toward death in old age has not changed. This study suggests evolutionary biology trumps everything, and so far, medical advances have been unable to beat these biological constraints."

The team hopes its findings will lead to greater understanding of the ecology and evolution of a wide range of animal species worldwide and contribute to their conservation.

Source

Myopia is on the rise. In the UK, the number of children with myopia has doubled in the last 50 years. Globally, it's projected that by 2050 half of the world's population will be myopic.

Although myopia—also known as near-sightedness or short-sightedness—can run in families, environmental factors, such as spending too much time indoors have a large influence. For most people, myopia develops from a mixture of both genetics and environmental factors. But while evidence shows that modern lifestyle factors contribute to myopia, scientists still aren't entirely sure why.

For instance, research shows that the amount of time a child spends outdoors can play a significant role in their risk of developing myopia. Not only do most studies show that children who spend more time outdoors are less likely to develop myopia, studies requiring children to spend extra time outdoors during school hours have shown the rate of myopia onset decreased compared with children who didn't spend additional time outdoors.

But researchers still aren't quite sure why this is the case. One theory is that the higher levels of light outdoors releases more dopamine into our retinal receptors (the nerves that process light signals in the eye), thus protecting against myopia.

Another suggestion is that the greater amount of physical activity children typically get outdoors prevents myopia. But studies have now shown that this has little effect.

It's also been suggested that the different patterns and details we see in outdoor versus indoor spaces might explain the increase in myopia. For example, one study suggests that the abundance of plain features and walls in indoor environments is to blame. This may also be why myopia tends to be more common in urban areas, however, more research is needed to understand this.

Modern lifestyles

Nevertheless, modern lifestyles often require us to spend a lot of our time indoors. For example, children are spending longer in formal education thanks to increases in school leaving age and more people pursuing higher education, which evidence suggests can cause myopia. Yet what aspects of formalized education are causing increases in myopia is still unknown. Prolonged reading, learning at close distances, time spent indoors and increased screen use might all be to blame.

While one study suggests reading at a distance closer than 25cm may be a risk for developing myopia, reading probably only has a small effect on developing myopia.

The effect of greater screen use on myopia in children also has mixed results—probably because estimating screen use and controlling it in a long-term experiment is difficult. Regardless, further research is needed to understand whether excessive screen use is to blame for higher rates of myopia, and why this is the case.

Given the risk factors for developing myopia, there are also concerns now that stay-at-home orders and home learning during the pandemic may have worsened children's eyesight. Although there has been no study yet looking at the effect on children in the UK, early results elsewhere suggest that the pandemic may cause more children to develop myopia—but it's anticipated the effects will be small. Whether the pandemic will have caused permanent increases in myopia is also yet to be seen.

Currently, the best advice for limiting the risk of developing myopia is to increase time spent outdoors, even by 40 minutes a day.

Source

Contaminants in generic medications used to treat conditions like diabetes, heart disease, stomachaches and heartburn may cause damage to DNA, affect basic cell functions and even increase a person's risk of cancer, according to a new UBC study.

"When we take these drugs, we do so knowing that they can come with side effects that are clearly described on the drug label. But what we don't expect is that our medicine cabinet may be full of toxins that can actually make us sick—or kill us," says Dr. Corey Nislow, commenting on the findings by researchers at his lab at UBC's faculty of pharmaceutical sciences.

People need to be especially vigilant regarding the contaminant N-nitrosamine—a nitrogen group attached to an amine group—considered a dangerous combination because amines will react with anything in a cell, while nitrogen groups can stall cell processes, explains Dr. Nislow.

First author and Ph.D. candidate Uche Joseph Ogbede says that for the first time they could see the effects of nitrosamines on cells, which opens the potential for solutions to lessen toxicity.

Nitrosamines were first noticed as an impurity in heart medications which also often have valsartan or losartan as active ingredients. Since 2018, this type of toxin has led to multiple contamination recalls by both Health Canada and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). They can be found in generics as early as 2012 and nitrosamines are now found in many different types of medications.

Although there have been no severe consequences or deaths documented from short-term intake, Dr. Nislow is concerned about the long-term effects. "We lack good data on this and the long-term consequences are a big unknown," he notes.

Generic medications are produced at a lower cost overseas and bought in larger quantities, Dr. Nislow says, and they are more widely used than their branded versions, which have higher quality control but are more expensive to produce.

"It's easy to assume that generic medication for common conditions is equivalent to the branded version, but in reality, they could be made with entirely different ingredients," explains Dr. Nislow.

These contaminants are found in hundreds of millions of generic drug prescriptions, used for chronic conditions where people might use them over long periods of time.

Studying yeast for answers

The research team used a test system from Dr. Nislow's previous yeast-based work to study the contaminants.

They screened 4,800 yeast strains with marked DNA, looking for those that were more sensitive and resistant after being exposed to the contaminants and found contaminants had significant effects on DNA repair and the machinery that makes cell proteins, which Dr. Nislow says is one of the most ancient cellular processes.

The contaminants they studied also affected the cell's mitochondria, which would lead to adverse effects on people's ability to efficiently convert food into energy.

"So, the very things that these drugs are being used to treat could ultimately be affected by the contaminants," says Dr. Nislow.

Higher quality control needed

The study recommends better safety and surveillance of the supply chain for medications, in addition to more research into the long-term effects of these contaminants.

Dr. Nislow hopes that moving forward there can be more transparency with generic drugs and stronger government measures when it comes to the quality control of these drugs.

The study is published in Scientific Reports.

Source

Researchers at Karolinska Institutet found industrial chemicals in the organs of fetuses conceived decades after many countries had banned the substances. In a study published in the journal Chemosphere, the researchers urge decision makers to consider the combined impact of the mix of chemicals that accumulate in people and nature.

"These are important findings that call for regulators to consider the collective impact of exposure to multiple chemicals rather than evaluating just one chemical at a time," says first author Richelle Duque Björvang, Ph.D. student at the Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology at Karolinska Institutet.

The researchers studied concentrations of 22 persistent organic pollutants (POPs). These are toxic chemicals that remain in the environment for long periods of time and accumulate in humans through food, drinking water and air particles. EU's members and many other countries have signed a treaty that prohibits or restricts manufacturing and use of these chemicals.

In the study, the researchers examined samples of fetal fat tissue, liver, heart, lung and brain from 20 pregnancies that for various reasons had ended in stillbirth in the third trimester in 2015-2016. The researchers identified at least 15 of the 22 POPs in every organ. Four chemicals were found in all tissues in all fetuses. The most pervasive chemicals were:

• HCB, a pesticide previously used to protect food crops from fungi;

• DDE, a metabolite of DDT, an insect killer used in the mid-1900s;

• Variants of PCBs, chemicals formerly used in a range of electrical products.

Estimating fetal exposure

Most current methods for estimating fetal exposure to chemicals rely on maternal blood and placenta samples as proxies.

The new study found that, for some of the chemicals, the concentrations in the fetal tissues exceeded those found in the maternal blood and placenta. This can be explained by the fact that these chemicals tend to accumulate in fat tissue due to their structure. However, levels in fetal liver and lung also exceeded those found in the mother. Some pesticides—PeCB, α–HCH, γ–HCH and oxychlordane—were detected in fetal tissue even when they were not quantified in maternal blood samples or the placenta. According to the researchers, these latest findings suggest that blood and placenta samples may give a misleading picture on the diversity and concentration of chemicals that babies are exposed to during early development.

This study only investigated the presence and concentration of the various chemicals but not their links to potential health risks. However, the researchers point out that several previous studies have linked early life exposure to POPs to adverse health outcomes such as low birth weight, gestational diabetes, ADHD, infertility, obesity and reduced sperm production. For example, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) recently revised their risk assessment of dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs, and concluded that the dietary intake in Europe is currently at a level that can disrupt fertility in men.

"Getting an accurate picture of chemical exposure in early human development is critical to assessing both short and long-term health consequences for future generations," says last author Pauliina Damdimopoulou, researcher in the Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology at Karolinska Institutet. "Therefore, we believe today's approaches estimating fetal chemical exposure, for example in birth cohort studies, need to be updated to better reflect the likelihood that for some chemicals, fetal exposure is actually greater than what the blood and placenta samples show."

Different types of tissue

Thirteen of the pregnancies also had data from an earlier study on PFAS (chemicals used in frying pans, food packaging and firefighting foam). By combining these data, the researchers were able to assess the proportion of chemicals in each type of tissue. While pesticides and PCBs were significantly overrepresented in fat tissue, more than half of the chemicals in the fetal lung, brain, liver and heart was due to PFAS. Overall, the highest concentration of a mix of chemicals were found in fat tissue and the lowest in the brain. The study found that the relative exposure of baby boys was higher compared to baby girls.

"Studies conducted in the 1960s and 1970s, when POPs were widely in use, found higher levels compared to ours," Richelle Duque Björvang says. "This shows that political action leading to restrictions in the use of chemicals has an impact on population exposures, although in the case of persistent chemicals it will take multiple generations to get rid of the exposure."

The researchers recognize that the study has some limitations, including a relatively modest sample size and that it only included fetuses who had died in the womb late in the pregnancy. Thus, it may not be fully representative of babies born alive.

The tissue samples were collected from the Stockholm Medical Biobank. The researchers have received funding from the Swedish Research Council for Sustainable Development (FORMAS), Jane & Aatos Erkko Foundation, and Women's Department in Sundsvall Development Fund.

Facts on POPs

• Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are toxic human-made chemicals that once released into the environment remain intact for exceptionally long periods of times and become widely distributed through air, soil and water.

• Currently, there are 30 POPs listed under the so-called Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, an international environmental treaty initiated by the United Nations to eliminate or restrict the production and use of POPs. More than 150 countries have ratified the agreement.

• The list includes pesticides, industrial chemicals and by-products, many of which were long banned by countries around the world but continue to affect the environment and animal and human health.

Source

Last month, China successfully landed and deployed the Zhurong rover on Mars, becoming the second country ever to set wheels on the surface of the red planet.

Last year the United States, the United Arab Emirates and China all launched missions to Mars, taking advantage of the relatively short journey time offered by the two planets' unusually close proximity.

Why are planetary scientists so obsessed with Mars? Why spend so much time and money on this one planet when there are at least seven others in our solar system, more than 200 moons, countless asteroids, and much more besides?

Fortunately, we are going to other worlds, and there are lots of missions to very exciting places in our solar system—worlds bursting with exotic features such as ice volcanoes, rings of icy debris, and huge magnetic fields.

There are currently 26 active spacecraft dotted around our solar system. Some are orbiting other planets and moons, some have landed on the surfaces of other worlds, and some have performed fly-bys to beam back images. Only half of them are visiting Mars.

Included in those 26 spacecraft are long-term missions like Voyager 1 and 2—which are still operational after over 40 years and have now left the Solar system and ventured into interstellar space. And it also includes some less famous, but no less weird and wonderful, spacecraft.

Take the Juno spacecraft in orbit around Jupiter, for example. Launched in 2011, it arrived in orbit around Jupiter almost five years later. It is now measuring various properties of the giant planet, including its magnetic field, atmospheric conditions, and determining how much water is in Jupiter's atmosphere. This will help theorists work out which planet formation theory is correct (or if new theories are needed). Juno has already surpassed its planned seven-year mission duration, and has been extended to at least 2025.

Active space probes in the Solar System. Credit: Olaf Frohn - http://www.planetary.org/multimedia/space-images/charts/whats-up-in-the-solar-system-frohn.html (image link), CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=80963751

Rocky ride

One of the most complex feats of astrodynamics was completed late last year when the Japanese Space Agency (JAXA) not only landed a spacecraft on an asteroid, but in a spectacular slingshot maneuver, returned a sample to Earth.

Hayabusa2, named after the Japanese term for a peregrine falcon, completed a rendezvous with asteroid 162173 Ryugu in 2018, surveying the surface and taking samples.

Departing in 2019, Hayabusa2 used its ion engines to change orbit and return to Earth. On December 5, 2020, a sample-return capsule about the size of a hatbox and weighing 16 kilograms was dropped through Earth's atmosphere, landing unscathed at the Woomera Test Range in Australia.

As JAXA begins analyzing the rocks and dust collected on the Ryugu asteroid, Hayabusa2 is off on its travels once more—this time to meet up with a second asteroid, 1998 KY_(26), some time in 2031.

‘Lagrange Points’ are positions in space where the gravitational forces of a two body system like the Sun and the Earth produce enhanced regions of attraction and repulsion. These can be used by spacecraft to reduce fuel consumption needed to remain in position. Credit: NASA/WMAP Science Team

Well of knowledge

Not included in the list of planetary missions earlier, are those spacecraft trapped in "gravitational wells" within our Solar system.

There are special locations in orbits called "Lagrangian points", which are gravitationally balanced spots between two bodies.

The Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) is one of four spacecraft close to the Lagrangian point between the Earth and the Sun, roughly 1.5 million kilometers from Earth (about four times further away than the Moon).

It makes observations of the Sun's outer layer and the solar wind, sending early warning back to Earth of potentially disastrous space weather. Geomagnetic storms from the Sun are powerful enough to hit the Earth with electromagnetic blasts so strong they have been known to take out country-wide power grids.

Another hostile location is our nearest planetary neighbor, Venus. Despite the searing temperatures and crushing pressures on the surface, NASA recently approved funding for two big missions to explore the origins of Venus and its atmosphere.

The discovery of phosphine gas in the upper atmosphere led life scientists to believe life may exist at the more habitable and cooler temperatures of higher altitudes.

Hot on the heels of the successful flight of the Ingenuity helicopter on Mars—the first flight of any powered aircraft on another world—NASA's Dragonfly mission will fly a drone through the atmosphere of Saturn's icy moon, Titan. Launching in 2026 and arriving in 2034, the rotorcraft will fly to dozens of promising locations on Titan looking for any chemical precursors or life similar to those on Earth.

< Watch the video at the source page. >

So how much does all this cost?

Governments tend to allocate relatively small amounts of their budgets to science and space exploration. Countries typically spend less than 1% of their budget on space missions—far less than social services or military defense.

Deciding what space missions will receive that money is very often driven by public interest. But trying to decide definitively which probe or spacecraft offers the most bang for buck is almost impossible.

When humans first set foot on the Moon, 25% of the world's population watched the video with bated breath, inspiring several generations of space explorers for decades afterwards. You can't put a price on that.

Source

Over the past few decades, surveillance cameras, also known as closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras, have become widely used by governments, law enforcement officers and private citizens to monitor public spaces, prevent crime and identify criminals. While the millions of surveillance cameras installed worldwide can play a crucial role in the prevention of crime and aid police investigations, they can also considerably restrict the privacy of citizens.

When combined with emerging facial recognition technology, surveillance cameras can become even more intrusive, as they enable the identification, monitoring and tracking of individuals. Moreover, advanced surveillance systems could hinder freedom of speech, by dissuading people from participating in public gatherings or protests for fear of being identified and persecuted.

While some studies have estimated the amount of CCTV cameras installed in cities worldwide, only a few have identified their exact locations. This makes it harder to assess the impact of large-scale surveillance systems and the extent to which they might be invading the privacy of citizens.

Researchers at Stanford University have recently carried out a study aimed at investigating the prevalence and locations of surveillance cameras in large cities in the U.S. and in other countries worldwide. Their paper, presented at the AAAI/ACM Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Ethics and Society, introduces a computer vision algorithm that can estimate the spatial distribution of surveillance cameras by analyzing Google street view and other street view images.

"Our main goal was to understand the number and location of surveillance cameras in large cities around the world," Hao Sheng, one of the researchers who carried out the study, told TechXplore. "Because collecting such data manually is often prohibitively expensive, we sought to develop methods that could be easily scaled up. As digital documentation of urban landscapes and computer vision technology have both advanced considerably in recent years, we thought that applying computer vision algorithms to existing street-view images might be possible."

In their study, Sheng and his colleagues followed three key steps. Firstly, they extracted street view images of 100,000 randomly sampled locations in each of the cities they examined. They specifically focused on 10 large cities in the U.S. (LA, New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Seattle, Milwaukee, Baltimore, Washington D.C., San Francisco and Boston) and 6 other cities worldwide (Tokyo, Bangkok, London, Seoul, Singapore and Paris).

Estimated camera density (cameras per km) for 10 large U.S. cities and 6 other major cities for the period 2016–2020. Credit: Sheng, Yao & Goel.

Subsequently, the researchers ran a computer vision algorithm on the street view images they extracted to automatically detect surveillance cameras captured in them. Finally, they asked human participants to browse through the images and verify the validity of the results gathered by the algorithm (i.e., confirm whether it accurately spotted the cameras).

"Our method combines the merits of computer vision models (which can be quickly deployed on millions of images) and humans (who can visually identify cameras with higher accuracy)," Sheng explained. "So, even if cameras only comprise a small percentage of street view images, we can still efficiently and accurately identify them."

The analyses carried out by Sheng and his colleagues yielded several interesting results. Firstly, the researchers found that the density of cameras in cities was highly correlated with the specific uses of given locations and with the racial profile of neighborhoods. For instance, they found that cameras were more likely to be installed in a city's commercial, industrial and mixed areas than in public or residential areas.

"Even after controlling for land use, we found a much higher density of cameras in majority-minority neighborhoods than in predominantly white neighborhoods," Sheng said. "We are still trying to understand the mechanism that drives these patterns, but our findings suggest that communities of color are disproportionately surveilled."

The findings gathered by this team of researchers could have important implications for the future installation of CCTV cameras in urban environments. For instance, they could spark ethical debates about the reasons for the intense monitoring of racial minorities or general discussions about the impact of large-scale surveillance on citizen's privacy.

In their next studies, Sheng and his colleagues plan to use the computer vision algorithm they developed to examine the prevalence of other types of cameras as well, such as doorbell cameras. Doorbell cameras, such as Google Nest and Amazon Ring, allow people to see whether someone is at the door and remotely communicate with visitors via their smartphone. In recent years, these smart doorbell systems have become particularly popular, particularly in residential neighborhoods.

"Some studies estimate that the number of doorbell cameras may have surpassed traditional surveillance cameras," Sheng said. "Measuring their prevalence will thus further our understanding of the extent of surveillance in our communities. We also suspect that they may be good proxies of social trust in a neighborhood. Of course, doorbell cameras are usually smaller, thus harder to identify from street view images, which might pose new challenges for our camera detection process."

Source

Exactly a year on from the discovery that a cheap steroid drug prevented Covid deaths, researchers say they have found another life-saving therapy.

It is expensive - a potent intravenous infusion of antibodies to neutralise the virus, rather than dampen the body's inflammatory response to it.

Results from the Recovery trial suggest it could help one in three of those in hospital with severe Covid.

For every 100 patients treated, experts calculate, it would save six lives.

Ground-breaking treatment

But only those who have not already made any antibodies of their own to fight the virus should be given the treatment, which costs between £1,000 and £2,000.

Kimberley Featherstone, 37, who received the treatment during the trial, said: "I feel very lucky that the trial was up and running by the time I was taken to hospital with Covid-19 and I was able to receive this ground-breaking treatment.

"I'm happy that by participating I played a part in finding out this treatment is successful."

The monoclonal antibody treatment, made by Regenoron, binds to the virus to stop it infecting cells and replicating.

In the trial, which included nearly 10,000 UK hospital patients, it significantly reduced the:

• risk of death

• length of hospital stay, by four days on average

• likelihood of needing a ventilator to breathe

Joint chief investigator Sir Martin Landray said: "Giving them this combination of two antibodies by an intravenous infusion then actually reduces their chances of dying by a fifth.

"What we found is now here we can use an antiviral treatment, in this case these antibodies, in patients who have got a one in three chance of dying untreated and we can reduce that risk for them."

Great uncertainty

The treatment was given in addition to the anti-inflammatory steroid drug dexamethasone, which itself cuts death risk by up to a third for the sickest Covid patients.

Sir Peter Horby, the other chief investigator, said there had been great uncertainty about whether antibody therapies were the right approach, when some other studies had found no benefit.

Using blood plasma from recovered patients - which contains antibodies that should recognise and fight the virus - has not proved effective as a Covid therapy, for example.

But the antibody treatment used in the Recovery trial contains large doses of two specific antibodies, made in the lab, that are good at latching on to the pandemic virus.

Sir Peter said: "It is wonderful to learn that even in advanced Covid-19 disease, targeting the virus can reduce mortality in patients who have failed to mount an antibody response of their own.

Source

The omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) are found in oily fish. Researchers from the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre assessed the effects of high doses of EPA and DHA in lab-grown neurones and then in patients to help clarify how they reduce inflammation and depression. This novel approach allowed the scientists to identify an important molecular mechanism which can help inform the development of potential new treatments involving omega-3 fatty acids for patients with depression.

Lead author Dr. Alessandra Borsini, NIHR Maudsley BRC Senior Postdoctoral Neuroscientist at King's College London, said: "Using a combination of laboratory and patient research our study has provided exciting new insight into how omega-3 fatty acids bring about anti-inflammatory effects that improve depression. For some time we have known that omega-3 PUFA can induce anti-depressant and anti-inflammatory effects but, without further understanding of how this happens in the human brain, it has been difficult to develop treatments. Our study has helped shine a light on the molecular mechanisms involved in this relationship which can inform the development of potential new treatments for depression using omega-3 PUFA."

Previous research has shown that people with major depressive disorder have higher levels of inflammation in their bodies than those without the disorder. There are currently no proven anti-inflammatory treatment strategies for depression and, although two important omega-3 PUFAs, EPA and DHA, have been shown to provide anti-inflammatory and antidepressant effects, the precise mechanism by which they do this is unknown.

Depression in a dishThe study set out to test the theory that when omega-3 fatty acids are utilised and processed in the body, some of their metabolites (known as lipid mediators) are able to protect the brain from the harmful effects of inflammation. Researchers used a validated in vitro human cell model known as 'depression in a dish' that was developed at the NIHR Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre and which uses cells from the hippocampus, a part of the brain fundamental in many cognitive, memory and learning areas thought to be important in depression. Hippocampal cells play an important role in the production of new neurones—neurogenesis.

The study showed that treating human hippocampal cells with EPA or DHA before being exposed to chemical messengers involved in inflammation called cytokines, prevented increased cell death and decreased neurogenesis. Both these impacts had been previously observed in cells exposed to cytokines alone. Further investigation confirmed these effects were mediated by the formation of several key lipid mediators produced by EPA and DHA, namely hydroxyeicosapentaenoic acid (HEPE), hydroxydocosahexaenoic acid (HDHA), epoxyeicosatetraenoic acid (EpETE) and epoxydocosapentaenoic acid (EpDPA), and these were detected for the first time in human hippocampal neurones. Further investigation showed that treatment with an enzyme inhibitor increased the availability of two of these metabolites (EpETE and EpDPA) suggesting a possible way by which future treatments could be optimised.

Professor Anna Nicolaou, professor of Biological Chemistry at the Faculty of Medical and Human Sciences, The University of Manchester, who led the team that measured the lipid mediators using mass spectrometry said: "The lipid mediators that our research identified are broken down in the body relatively quickly, which means they may only be available for a relatively short time. By testing the effect of inhibitors of the enzymes involved in the metabolism of omega-3 PUFA we showed that we can greatly improve how long they can have an effect in the body and ultimately, increase their efficacy.

This is very important for the development of new treatments and means that patients could be given higher doses of EPA and DHA together with these enzyme inhibitors to increase the amount of these important compounds in their blood over time."

Omega-3 metabolites in patients

The study assessed twenty-two patients with major depression who were given either 3 grams of EPA or 1.4 grams of DHA daily for twelve weeks. The lipid metabolites of EPA and DHA were measured in their blood before and after the omega-3 PUFA treatment, along with a score of their depressive symptoms. In both groups of patients, EPA or DHA treatment was associated with an increase in their respective metabolites and a significant improvement in depressive symptoms—an average reduction in symptom scores of 64% and 71% in the EPA and DHA groups respectively. In addition, higher levels of the same metabolites identified in the in vitro experiments were correlated with lower levels of depressive symptoms.

The levels of EPA and DHA used in this study are concentrations that most likely cannot be achieved with dietary consumption of oily fish, a rich source of omega-3 PUFAs, but require therapeutic supplements.

Future Research

The results of the study indicate that the bioactive lipid mediators produced by the breakdown of EPA and DHA in the body could be targeted as a mechanism to reduce depression and inflammation but there is a need to ensure that their effects are prolonged in order for this approach to be successful. Previous research indicates a key enzyme in the omega-3 fatty acid metabolism could be a valid option for drug repurposing and could be used for other inflammation-associated brain disorders, including depression, where at least a sub-group of patients often have chronic levels of inflammation.

Senior author of the paper, Professor Carmine Pariante, NIHR Maudsley BRC Affective Disorders Interface with Medicine Theme Lead said: "There is ever growing interest in the links between the immune system, inflammation and depression but in order to develop new treatments in this area we need to better understand the mechanisms behind these relationships.

Our study has provided important insight into how known anti-inflammatory compounds—the omega-3 PUFA—help reduce depression. By identifying and measuring the exact lipid mediators that are involved, identifying the enzyme that prolongs their effects and finding the same lipid mediators in depressed patients treated with omega-3 PUFA and demonstrating improvements in symptoms, we have provided vital information to help shape clinical trials for future therapeutic approaches with omega-3 fatty acids.

"It is important to highlight that our research has not shown that by simply increasing omega-3 fatty acids in our diets or through taking nutritional supplements we can reduce inflammation or depression. The mechanisms behind the associations between depression and omega-3 PUFA are complicated and require further research and clinical trials to fully understand how they work and inform future therapeutic approaches."

The study was a collaboration between researchers from King's College London, The University of Manchester and China Medical University.

The paper "Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids protect against inflammation through production of LOX and CYP450 lipid mediators: relevance for major depression and for human hippocampal neurogenesis" was published today in Molecular Psychiatry.

Source

 

The universe is constantly beaming its history to us. For instance: Information about what happened long, long ago, contained in the long-length radio waves that are ubiquitous throughout the universe, likely hold the details about how the first stars and black holes were formed. There’s a problem, though. Because of our atmosphere and noisy radio signals generated by modern society, we can’t read them from Earth.

 

That’s why NASA is in the early stages of planning what it would take to build an automated research telescope on the far side of the moon. One of the most ambitious proposals would build the Lunar Crater Radio Telescope, the largest (by a lot) filled-aperture radio telescope dish in the universe. Another duo of projects, called FarSide and FarView, would connect a vast array of antennas—eventually over 100,000, many built on the moon itself and made out of its surface material—to pick up the signals. The projects are all part of NASA’s Institute for Advanced Concepts (NIAC) program, which awards innovators and entrepreneurs with funding to advance radical ideas in hopes of creating breakthrough aerospace concepts. While they are still hypothetical, and years away from reality, the findings from these projects could reshape our cosmological model of the universe.

 

“With our telescopes on the moon, we can reverse-engineer the radio spectra that we record, and infer for the first time the properties of the very first stars,” said Jack Burns, a cosmologist at the University of Colorado Boulder and the co-investigator and science lead for both FarSide and FarView. “We care about those first stars because we care about our own origins—I mean, where did we come from? Where did the Sun come from? Where did the Earth come from? The Milky Way?”

 

The answers to those questions come from a dim moment in the universe about 13.7 billion years ago.

 

When the universe cooled about 400,000 years after the Big Bang, the first atoms, neutral hydrogen, released their photons in a burst of electromagnetic radiation that scientists can still see today. This cosmic microwave background, or CMB, was first detected in 1964. Today scientists use complex tools like the European Space Agency’s Planck probe to detect its minute fluctuations, which create a snapshot view of the distribution of matter and energy in the young universe. Scientists can also fast-forward about a hundred million years to study much of the roughly 13 billion years since the formation of the first stars, or “Cosmic Dawn,” thanks to visual data gleaned from starlight by telescopes like the Hubble (and soon, the upgraded James Webb). They allow us to see so far that we are literally looking into the past.

 

After the initial fireball from the Big Bang faded into the CMB, but before the first stars started burning, there was a period when almost no light was being emitted in the universe. Scientists refer to this period without visible or infrared light as the “Cosmic Dark Ages.” During this epoch, it seems likely that the universe was very simple, consisting mostly of neutral hydrogen, photons, and dark matter. Evidence about what happened during this period might help us understand how dark matter and dark energy—which by our best guesses make up about 95 percent of the mass of the universe, yet are largely invisible to us and which we still don’t really understand—shaped its formation.

 

There are clues about what happened during the Cosmic Dark Ages whizzing around, hidden in hydrogen, which still makes up the majority of the known matter in the universe. Each time the spin of a hydrogen’s atom’s electrons flips, it gives off a radio wave at a specific wavelength: 21 centimeters. But those wavelengths released during the Cosmic Dark Ages are not actually 21 centimeters long by the time they reach Earth. Because the universe is rapidly expanding, hydrogen wavelengths also expand, or “red-shift,” stretching out when they travel across vast distances. This means each wave’s length functions like a timestamp: The longer the wave, the older it is. By the time they reach Earth, they are more like ten or even 100 meters long, with frequencies below the FM band.

 

Despite their low frequency, these waves could be captured by a radio telescope—if our atmosphere wasn’t in the way. The ionosphere, ionized by the sun’s electrical energy, absorbs or reflects this information before it reaches us. Our radio communications on Earth disrupt it, too. So imagine it: From the Dark Ages of the cosmos they travel, ready to tell us what exactly was going on when they were made, and then BLAM—ionosphered. Bye-bye, cosmic truths.

 

“We are absolutely completely ignorant about the radiation of the universe at long wavelengths that won’t go through our atmosphere,” says John Mather, a cosmologist, astrophysicist, and Nobel Laureate for his work studying the cosmic microwave background. “There could be big surprises out there.”

 

That’s where the moon comes in. On its far side, it blocks Earth’s radio signals. There is no ionosphere. For incredibly long wavelengths, it’s a perfect port of call.

 

To capture them, Burns’s FarSide and FarView proposals eschew a solid-aperture radio telescope (imagine the late Arecibo) in favor of a vast array of simple dipole antennas—much like the rabbit ears on your grandpa’s old TV. FarSide would require a 590-kilogram base station and 128 pairs of antennas connected by a tether, which would be unspooled in the shape of four spiral arms across a 10-kilometer swath of the moon. A single lunar rover would handle the construction. The base station would serve as a central processing center for the signal data picked up by the antennas, and would beam it to an alternative relay satellite orbiting the moon.

FarView, a more ambitious program that’s been designed with the help of Houston-based Lunar Resources, Inc., would spread 100,000 dipole antennas across 400 square kilometers of the moon. But the plan isn’t just an upscaled version of FarSide. FarView builds itself—out of the moon. First, a team of automated rovers would gather up regolith and deliver it to a “factory” that could extract aluminum. Another ten or so rovers would fabricate thin antennas out of that metal and then use an electrolysis technique to electroplate them onto the lunar surface. Solar panels to run the system could also be made onsite.

 

Burns’ idea is to use arrays like these to create a map of specific areas of the universe during the Dark Ages. The longer the neutral hydrogen wavelength, the farther back into time scientists know they’re looking. The wavelengths might also show if the neutral hydrogen that released the wave was warmer or colder than the cosmic microwave background released shortly after the Big Bang; that information might reveal the role dark matter played in the happenings of the Dark Ages, and offer clues about what, exactly, dark matter is. “I like to tell my physics colleagues: ‘Imagine we have just built you a brand new high-energy particle accelerator, and it’s bigger than anything we could ever imagine. Well, the universe did that for us.’ Those particles are there from the Dark Ages and the Cosmic Dawn,” Burns says. “We are going to use our radio telescopes like a particle detector to understand the kind of physics that was operating in this un-sampled time in the universe.”

 

“This is a very important part of the story of the thermal history of the universe,” agrees Mather. “Was the expansion of the universe cooling this matter, or were objects like stars turning on and warming the matter up again?”

 

Burns’s twin projects are the endpoint of more than 35 years of research, including an article he wrote for Scientific American in 1990 that laid out the obstacles to building a 10- to 15-meter lunar radio telescope at the time. “I really thought we’d have one of these telescopes on the moon by now,” he says.

But NASA’s push to return to the moon means Burns’s dream may be coming true. So far, both FarSide and FarView have received $125,000 in funding from NASA for initial engineering design studies. In 2022, the agency intends to dispatch a single low-frequency radio spectrometer via a commercial lunar lander. The device is called Radio wave Observations at the Lunar Surface of the photoElectron Sheath (or Rolses), and it will be an important proof of concept for future moon-based radio telescopes. Another radio signal probe called the Dark Ages Polarimeter Pathfinder (Dapper), is proposed as a payload to land on the lunar farside along with the LuSEE radio instrument in 2024. It will capture redshifted 21-centimeter radio wavelengths on the far side before downloading its data to Earth via a lunar-orbiting relay satellite.

 

But still, there’s an even more jaw-dropping idea: NASA Jet Propulsion Labs’ Lunar Crater Radio Telescope, which just received $500,000 in Round II NIAC funding. It would create the most audacious radio telescope ever built. Its aluminum mesh dish would stretch a kilometer across and 600 meters deep, housed inside a crater 3 kilometers wide. Its parabolic dish would catch long-wavelength radio waves traveling through space and direct them to a receiver suspended over the crater.

 

Saptarshi Bandyopadhyay, the roboticist who’s the mastermind behind the concept, was inspired by Burns’s 1990 paper on why a radio telescope in a lunar crater wouldn’t work. (Or at least, couldn’t work back then.) Those limitations included finding the perfect crater and the difficulty of constructing the towers required by traditional radio telescope dishes. But finding the right spot is currently being accomplished thanks to the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Mission, and a new design and materials mean towers are no longer required. “Our innovation was saying: ‘Oh look, we can solve all of this now, because we have all these technologies that can take care of these issues,’” Bandyophadhyay says. “If we redesign all of these ideas in this new way, we can make this happen.”

 

The LCRT would be more expensive and far more complicated to execute than FarSide’s 128-antenna approach. But it would also provide extremely accurate data, giving us a clearer view of, say, how galaxies were formed 12.5 billion years ago. By capturing the longest wavelengths, Mather says, it might map a picture of “a very simple universe, where there were no stars yet, no galaxies, just some blobs” showing the density of dark matter. “Finding that,” he continues, “would be very cool.”

 

Bandyopadhyay’s team will use the $500,000 to run complex simulations testing different ways rovers might build the enormous dish. They have a pretty good idea of what will work. Instead of a tower, they’ll use a simplified design in which the telescope’s receiver will hang on wires strung across the crater—a spider perched precipitously above its web. The web will be a lattice of aluminum mesh, composed of radial wires running from the lander—situated at the bottom of the crater—up to the rim. Circumferential wires will electrically connect them.

 

To build it, half of the landing craft, carrying the light, durable mesh that will make up the webbed dish, would land in the crater. The other half, carrying DuAxel rovers designed by JPL, would split off and land at the crater’s rim. The rovers are 4-wheeled workhorses with two axles that can separate and reconnect with each other. Half of each rover would anchor to the rim, then belay its partner down to the main lander on the crater floor. The crawler would attach to the aluminum mesh at the lander, then climb back up the crater, unfurling the web behind it, which could simply unfold, like a giant fishing net. After making its way back up the rim, each rover would anchor the dish’s radial lift wires in place.

 

And if that won’t work, Bandyopadhyay has a second plan. “Another idea is to not use robots, but to fire harpoons into the crater wall” from the landing craft at the bottom of the crater, he says, with the rovers helping to tension the aluminum mesh dish.

 

Needless to say, all three project concepts are up against some major challenges. The NIAC funding is just a drop in the bucket; each would cost more than $1 billion to develop, build, and become operational. (“I would like to say to anyone who has money that if you give me $5 billion, I can launch this tomorrow,” Bandyopadhyay says.) 

 

There’s also the problem of labor. All three projects propose using rovers, which would need to hibernate to survive the -173 Celcius temperatures of the lunar night—which lasts 14 Earth days. And it’s unclear if it would be best to use rovers that are automated, or operated by astronauts on the moon, in orbit, or on Earth. Most of all, the precise strokes of orchestrating not just a successful landing but also a flawless rover-based construction project on a vast scale are … let’s say, yet to be determined.

 

On an optimal schedule, FarSide could begin operations before the end of the decade; FarView in the 2030s; and the LCRT by 2040. “I would personally be very surprised to see it launch before I retire,” Bandyopadhyay says.

 

In the meantime, other projects may help us understand the secrets of the Cosmic Dark Ages. The new James Webb telescope, which is expected to launch this fall to study the Cosmic Dawn, may provide data that could help scientists extrapolate backwards into the Dark Ages. And researchers are working to better study the more limited neutral hydrogen frequencies that they can observe from Earth.

 

But until they either reach the far side or run out of time, Bandyopadhyay, Burns, and others will keep shooting for the moon. “I’m a child of optimism and science fiction,” he says. “I want—not for myself, but for my grandkids or great-grandkids—to enable space travel, matter and antimatter engines, and things like that. And we’ll be nowhere then if we don’t seek answers to fundamental questions like ‘What is the universe made of?’ right now.”

NASA Might Put a Huge Telescope on the Far Side of the Moon (may require free registration)

U.S. workers are some of the most stressed employees in the world, according to Gallup’s latest State of the Global Workplace report, which captures how people are feeling about work and life in the past year.

U.S. and Canadian workers, whose survey data are combined in Gallup’s research, ranked highest for daily stress levels of all groups surveyed. Some 57% of U.S. and Canadian workers reported feeling stress on a daily basis, up by eight percentage points from the year prior and compared with 43% of people who feel that way globally, according to Gallup’s 2021 report.

This spike isn’t surprising to Jim Harter, Gallup’s chief workplace scientist, who tells CNBC Make It that rates of daily stress, worry, sadness and anger have been trending upward for American workers since 2009. Concerns over the virus, sickness, financial insecurity and racial trauma all contributed to added stress during the pandemic.

But stress spikes were especially acute for women in the last year: 62% of working women in the U.S. and Canada reported daily feelings of stress compared with 52% of men, showing the lasting impact of gendered expectations for caregiving in the household, ongoing child-care challenges and women’s overrepresentation in low-wage service jobs most disrupted by the pandemic. By contrast, the daily stress levels for women in Western Europe went down in the last year, which researchers attribute to social safety nets for parents and workers to prevent unemployment.

And while employee engagement dipped in the rest of the world, it rose to 34% in the U.S. The correlation of higher engagement but also higher stress can result in burnout and mental health challenges and indicates “the intersection of work and life needs some work,” Harter says.

Young people expect their workplace to improve their overall well-being

These sentiments come at a time when younger generations expect their workplaces to provide more value than just a paycheck, Harter says, drawing on previous Gallup research. And in turn, he says organizations have a responsibility to help improve employee well-being if they want to support a resilient workforce; improve learning and performance; and attract top talent.

He points to five elements workplaces can focus on to improve employee engagement and help individuals thrive: career well-being, social well-being, financial well-being, physical well-being and community.

Stress in any one of these areas, such as financial stress due to inequitable pay, or community stress due to an unsafe work environment, can negatively impact a worker’s mental health.

Leaders can do an audit, like through surveys and focus groups, to see if any of their company policies, structures, communications or programs negatively impact their employees’ overall well-being. And when leaders introduce new programs or benefits, Harter says, leaders should connect the value of them to “those five elements, so people understand why you’re providing various benefits, and why you’re trying to provide an overall culture of thriving.”

Who plays the biggest role in employee well-being

It’s crucial CEOs communicate this priority from the top, Harter says, but managers play the biggest role in actually helping improve worker well-being throughout all levels of an organization.

“The most important thing employers can do is to equip managers to have the right kinds of conversations with people,” Harter says. He says companies should be doing more to upskill their managers to facilitate meaningful and ongoing conversations. At least once a week, he says, managers should take the time to get to know their employees’ personal lives, in addition to what they have going on at work and how the two intersect.

“What dictates employee engagement and high well-being is very situational,” Harter says. “We have to equip them to have the right kinds of conversations so they can really impact people and help them find the resources they need.”

Manager training should also be inclusive to recognize workers who need the most flexibility and support, for example, a mom who needs flexibility to do her best work while also taking on child care. Managers can not only point their employees to the best resources, but also be an advocate to senior leaders about introducing new policies or benefits that their workers don’t have but need.

As Harter puts it, “managers are in the best position to understand their employees’ life situation well enough to adjust the work to accommodate them.”

Additionally, some organizations are investing in well-being coaches, seeing that employees who are fulfilled and secure in their personal lives can contribute to the business’s success.

“Having leaders in an organization who authentically believe in improving worker well-being, that’s important to culture,” Harter says.

Source

A growing sense of inequality is undermining trust in both society’s institutions and capitalism, according to a long-running global survey.

The 2020 Edelman Trust Barometer – now in its 20th year – has found many people no longer believe working hard will give them a better life.

Despite strong economic performance, a majority of respondents in every developed market do not believe they will be better off in five years’ time.

This means that economic growth no longer appears to drive trust, at least in developed markets – upending the conventional wisdom.

“We are living in a trust paradox,” said Richard Edelman, CEO of Edelman.

“Since we began measuring trust 20 years ago, economic growth has fostered rising trust. This continues in Asia and the Middle East but not in developed markets, where national income inequality is now the more important factor.

Fears are stifling hope, and long-held assumptions about hard work leading to upward mobility are now invalid.

Growing ‘trust chasm’ between elites and the public

Fifty-six per cent of the surveyed global population said capitalism in its current form does more harm than good in the world.

Most employees (83 percent) globally are worried about job loss due to automation, a looming recession, lack of training, cheaper foreign competition, immigration and the gig economy.

Fifty-seven percent of respondents worry about losing the respect and dignity they once enjoyed in their country.

Nearly two in three feel the pace of technological change is too fast. Australia recorded one of the largest declines of trust in technology.

Australians were most worried about losing their job to the gig economy, followed by recession, lack of training, and foreign competitors.

The study also found a growing “trust chasm” between elites and the public that could be a reflection of income inequality, Edelman said.

We now observe an Alice in Wonderland moment of elite buoyancy and mass despair,” he said.

While 65 per cent of the worldwide informed public (aged 25-65, university-educated, in the top 25 per cent of household income) said they trust their institutions, only 51 per cent of the mass public (everyone else, representing 83 per cent of the total global population) said the same.

“The result is a world of two different trust realities,” the report says.

“The informed public – wealthier, more educated, and frequent consumers of news – remain far more trusting of every institution than the mass population.

“In a majority of markets, less than half of the mass population trust their institutions to do what is right.

“There are now a record eight markets showing all-time-high gaps between the two audiences – an alarming trust inequality.”

Trust levels among the informed public in Australia were at 68 per cent, far higher than the 45 per cent recorded among the mass population.

Source

Peripheral nerves connect your brain and spinal cord to the rest of your body. The peripheral nerves in your arms and hands allow you to move and to feel.

But if those nerves become injured, you might start to experience the sensation of "pins and needles" and other unpleasant symptoms.

Here are the basics of peripheral nerves injuries, including some specific details on the most common type of this injury, carpal tunnel syndrome.

There are a few types of peripheral nerve injuries:

• Compression—This happens when you have pressure on your nerve. Some examples include carpal tunnel syndrome and cubital tunnel syndrome.

• Trauma—This could be something like a significant cut. The sooner we can get that repaired, the sooner the nerves can start regenerating.

For trauma injuries, it's important to be evaluated early. For example, let's say you have a cut in your forearm that needs stitches. The nerves across the repair site are made up of little cables that have to regenerate from where it's sewn back together all the way back to the hand. They regenerate very slowly—only an inch per month.

Carpal tunnel syndrome is one of the most common peripheral nerve injuries. Typical symptoms of carpal tunnel syndrome include:

• Night pain—This means you wake up in the middle of the night to shake your hand because it's gone numb.

• Numbness in the fingers—All fingers except the pinky are affected.

• Weakness in the hand—You might notice that you start dropping objects more frequently.

Risk factors for carpal tunnel include:

• Having diabetes.

• Being female, particularly during pregnancy.

• Using vibratory tools, like jackhammers.

Although it's a commonly held belief, using a keyboard is not actually shown to cause carpal tunnel syndrome.

What treatment options are available for carpal tunnel syndrome?

The first line of treatment is to wear braces at night. This helps keep the wrist in a neutral position. Steroid injections might also help.

If carpal tunnel symptoms persist, surgery is recommended. The surgery is an outpatient procedure, and recovery takes about a month. Surgeons make a small incision in the palm, and then open up the carpal tunnel so that the nerve no longer has pressure on it.

Source

Results from a Phase 3 clinical trial enrolling 29,960 adult volunteers in the United States and Mexico show that the investigational vaccine known as NVX-CoV2373 demonstrated 90.4% efficacy in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 disease. The candidate showed 100% protection against moderate and severe disease. In people at high risk of developing complications from COVID-19 (people 65 years or older and people under age 65 with certain comorbidities or with likely regular exposure to COVID-19), the vaccine showed 91.0% efficacy in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 disease.

Safety data indicate the investigational vaccine was generally well-tolerated. Mild-to-moderate injection site pain and tenderness were the most common local symptoms among participants, and fatigue, headache and muscle pain lasting less than two days were the most common systemic symptoms.

Novavax, Inc., of Gaithersburg, Maryland, developed the investigational vaccine and led the clinical trial known as PREVENT-19. The Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), a component of the HHS Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health, provided funding support for the trial as part of the federal COVID-19 response.

The PREVENT-19 trial began in late December 2020 and enrolled adult volunteers at 119 study sites, including those in the NIAID-supported COVID-19 Prevention Network (CoVPN). Participants were randomly assigned to receive two shots, 21 days apart, of either the investigational vaccine or a saline placebo. Randomization occurred in a 2:1 ratio with two volunteers receiving NVX-CoV2373 for each one who received placebo. Because the trial was blinded, neither investigators nor participants knew who received the candidate vaccine.

PREVENT-19 was designed to evaluate whether NVX-CoV2373 can prevent symptomatic COVID-19 disease seven or more days after the second injection relative to placebo. The results shared today are based on 77 cases of symptomatic COVID-19 that investigators observed among trial participants from January 25 through April 30, 2021. Investigators recorded 63 cases among the approximately 10,000 participants who received placebo and 14 cases among the approximately 20,000 participants who received the investigational vaccine. Of the 63 COVID-19 cases in the placebo group, investigators classified 10 as moderate and four as severe. There were no cases of moderate or severe disease in the investigational vaccine group.

NVX-CoV2373 is a subunit vaccine made from a stabilized form of the coronavirus spike protein using the company's recombinant protein nanoparticle technology. The purified protein antigens in the vaccine cannot replicate or cause COVID-19. The vaccine also contains a proprietary adjuvant, MatrixM. Adjuvants are additives that enhance desired immune system responses to vaccine. NVX-CoV2373 is administered by injection in liquid form and can be stored, handled and distributed at above-freezing temperatures (35° to 46°F.) A single vaccine dose contains 5 micrograms (mcg) of protein and 50 mcg of adjuvant. The vaccine is administered as two intramuscular injections 21 days apart. The technology used for this vaccine was developed under a long-standing contract with the Department of Defense.

Results from a Phase 3 clinical trial enrolling 15,000 adults in the United Kingdom showed a two-dose regimen of NVX-CoV2373 was highly effective in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 overall and also demonstrated high efficacy against the Alpha variant strain of SARS-CoV-2.

An independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) is overseeing PREVENT-19 to ensure the safe and ethical conduct of the study. All Phase 3 clinical trials of candidate vaccines supported through the federal COVID-19 response are overseen by a common DSMB convened by NIAID.

Source

The Centers for Disease Control announced that in most cases, vaccinated adults in the U.S. could start going without masks, even indoors—a long-awaited benchmark to signal a return to a more normal life. But many people still have lingering questions about the COVID-19 vaccines and whether or not they're needed, especially if you've already had COVID-19.

Jennifer Pisano is an Associate Professor of Medicine in Infectious Diseases at the University of Chicago. She serves as medical director of antimicrobial stewardship and infection control at the University of Chicago Medicine.

"As an infectious diseases expert and someone who contracted COVID-19 myself, I'm here to share my insights," said Pisano.

I'm young and healthy and I haven't caught COVID yet. Do I need to get a vaccine?

Yes, absolutely. The SARS-CoV-2 virus is still circulating in our communities, and we haven't reached herd-immunity levels of vaccination yet. Even if you are young and don't have any underlying health conditions that would put you at extra risk, the way individual people respond to COVID-19 is unpredictable—that's part of what makes it so dangerous.

In almost every case, I would recommend getting vaccinated. It protects not only you, but also those who are close to you and the people you love. If you don't want to get it for your own protection, get it for them.

Do I still need the vaccine if I've already had COVID-19?

Absolutely. While we know recovering from a COVID-19 infection means you will have circulating antibodies in your system, we are still learning about how the immune system handles the antibody response after a natural infection. We're not sure how protective the antibodies are from different kinds of infections—such as an asymptomatic infection versus a symptomatic infection. With vaccination, we know that people with healthy immune systems are getting a great antibody response. So I would recommend vaccination even after a COVID-19 infection to get the best protection.

On top of that, if you live with people who are at higher risk of severe infection or may not develop a strong antibody level after vaccination, getting your own COVID-19 vaccination may make it less likely that you will transmit the virus to them.

When should I get vaccinated after having COVID-19?

The current guidance says that as long as you are no longer at risk of exposing other people to the virus, you can get your vaccine at any time. That means that once you are no longer in isolation and are no longer infectious, any time is fine.

The exception is for people who received monoclonal antibodies as part of their COVID-19 treatment. The current recommendation is that these patients wait at least 90 days after their treatment to be vaccinated, because they will already have COVID-19 antibodies circulating in their system and we just don't know enough about the virus or its antibodies to know if this particular treatment could interfere with the vaccine's effectiveness.

Is it better to gain immunity through exposure to COVID-19 or through a vaccine?

With some viruses, such as chicken pox, being infected with the virus itself grants stronger immune protection than the chicken pox vaccine; however, in those cases, you then have to deal with all the complications of having the virus. When it comes to COVID-19, it's really hard to know whether being exposed to the virus is more protective of future infection than the vaccine, simply because we don't know the SARS-CoV-2 virus well enough yet.

With natural immunity, which is the protection we get after being infected with a virus, the immune response can be variable. For example: the number of antibodies your body produces may depend on how much of the virus you're exposed to. And there is likely beneficial variation in the types of antibodies being produced. The vaccinations currently available in the U.S. have been shown to effectively stimulate antibodies against the virus' spike protein. New vaccines are being created that make antibodies to other parts of the virus as well. Both immunity from natural infection and vaccination stimulate a T-cell response that will hopefully provide you with protection from the virus for a longer time.

While it's possible some people may have a higher antibody response after a natural infection than they would after vaccination, we're still learning about this new virus, and we don't know how protective natural immunity really is, especially when there is such a continuum of different types of infections. We don't have clear data on how antibody responses from a mild infection compare to a severe infection, or how protective those antibody responses are.

On the other hand, we do know that the vaccine is very protective. In most people, getting vaccinated generates a lot of antibodies. So far, the vaccines appear to be incredibly effective, especially when it comes to preventing severe infections, hospitalizations and death.

Is there any extra risk if I get the vaccine after having had COVID-19?

There are a lot of anecdotal reports that many people who have had COVID-19 experience stronger side effects after their first vaccine dose, while most people who have never had COVID-19 have a stronger response after the second dose. But each person's experience is unique. Different people have different side effects and some people who haven't had COVID-19 report very strong side effects, too.

It's also important to note that it's possible many people who are being vaccinated were exposed to COVID-19 and had an asymptomatic infection without realizing it, which could contribute to the variation in side effects.

Personally, I found the side effects of my first vaccine to be pretty strong—it felt like I had COVID-19 again—but this time without the scary cough and shortness of breath. I had a high fever, chills and muscle aches, but it was not as overwhelming as I had feared. After a day or two, I was back to normal, and the side effects were certainly easier to manage than being sick with COVID-19. It was helpful to expect the side effects and to know my immune system was getting a boost. I was lucky to be able to plan to spend a day or two in bed. After my second vaccine, I just had a sore arm.

Can I still get COVID-19 after having the vaccine?

Yes, you can still get COVID-19 after getting the vaccine. In fact, we're sometimes seeing people pop up with reinfections. In the majority of cases, these are people who are being screened asymptomatically and just happen to be positive for the virus, or who show mild symptoms of the virus. The vaccine is intended to prevent severe infections and hospitalizations and it's doing an excellent job!

We can predict who might not have the best immune response to the vaccine—these are usually people who have other health conditions affecting the strength of their immune system, such as organ transplants or cancer. These people are likely to have already been taking precautions to prevent illness even before the pandemic and will most benefit from continuing to follow other guidance on preventing COVID-19 even after their vaccination, such as mask wearing and social distancing.

We also think that the amount of virus a person is exposed to can influence the severity of infection. So even as masking guidance changes and people start gathering in larger crowds again, individuals should be aware of their own comfort levels and remember that even after vaccination, there is still some risk of possible infection.

I'm still nervous!

I understand. I was nervous about getting my vaccine, too! After dealing with COVID-19, I was worried about the possible side effects, and the clinical trials hadn't really looked at whether there were any extra risks to getting the vaccine if a person already had the virus. But when my ticket came up, I decided to get my vaccine. I knew that it would give me more protection in the long term, and I had other personal reasons, too.

I wanted to feel comfortable seeing my parents again—to spend time with my family and not worry about spreading the virus. I recently had the one-year anniversary of my COVID-19 diagnosis, and I get a little emotional to think about how far we've come. To think that we're able to start seeing people in person again, thanks to these vaccines.

I am grateful to have had the opportunity to be vaccinated, and I hope that my patients will choose to be vaccinated, too.

Source

Young people, women and those on lower incomes fared worst in maintaining their wellbeing during COVID-19 lockdowns in South Australia, according to the results of a new Flinders University survey.

The study measured the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the wellbeing of South Australians using an innovative wellbeing framework that reflects on various dimensions of life developed by Flinders University researchers and endorsed by the United Nations Development Program.

A voluntary online survey comprising 56 questions related to individual wellbeing was distributed via social media from in August and September 2020. There were 579 responses, providing a statistically representative sample for South Australia with 99% confidence and a 5% margin of error.

The results show that most respondents (71%) were able to maintain overall wellbeing during the pandemic, but more than a half of respondents could not maintain wellbeing in psychological and emotional health.

The drivers of an inability to maintain overall wellbeing reveals that low-income individuals, younger respondents (aged 18-24) suffered disproportionate hardships when compared to the rest of the state's population.

Results Summary:

• 79% of those aged 65 and over maintained overall wellbeing compared to 53% for 18-24 age group.
• Community vitality wellbeing is strong across South Australia.
• 90% of respondents with pets said their pets were a benefit to their wellbeing during COVID-19.
• 28 percentage point drop in those who felt highly hopeful or positive about life before and after the period of self-isolation/lockdown for COVID-19.
• Psychological health and physical health were the aspects most heavily impacted among those who could not maintain wellbeing.
• 92% were accepting of the Government policies on managing the COVID-19 pandemic.
• 64.6% rated the performance of the South Australian Government as high or very high.
• Among respondents who could not maintain overall wellbeing:
• 93% reported feeling depressed or anxious,
• 78% experienced problems sleeping,
• 86% had problems concentrating.
• 63% reported a weekly income of less than the minimum wage.
• 60% experienced interruption to ongoing health related treatment due to restrictions.
• 38% had to cut down the consumption of usual food items.
• 35% partook of more alcohol and/or tobacco than usual.

More than one-third of respondents (38%) reported an increase in interpersonal conflict in their household
Chief Investigator Associate Professor Udoy Saikia says the analysis of the survey data presents some concerning results about the mental health impact of the pandemic, but also offers an insight into the benefits of parks in SA communities.

"While the psychological health dimension of wellbeing was hit the hardest due to COVID-19, other dimensions of wellbeing such as "community vitality" and "relationship with the environment" have played a crucial role in enabling South Australians to maintain their wellbeing."

"For example, 63% of the respondents mentioned that during COVID-19, they were able to draw on the support of friends and family to help with difficult situations and share with them their worries and concerns. Similarly, 84% of the respondents said that the use of outdoor spaces contributed to maintaining their wellbeing during COVID-19."

Source

So-called “good fatty acids” are essential for human health and much sought after by those who try to eat healthily. Among the Omega-3 fatty acids, DHA or docosahexaenoic acid is crucial to brain function, vision, and the regulation of inflammatory phenomena.

In addition to these virtues, DHA is also associated with a reduction in the incidence of cancer. How it works is the subject of a major discovery by a multidisciplinary team of University of Louvain (UCLouvain) researchers, who have just elucidated the biochemical mechanism that allows DHA and other related fatty acids to slow the development of tumors. This is a major advance that has recently been published in the prestigious journal Cell Metabolism.

Key to the discovery: interdisciplinarity

In 2016, Olivier Feron’s UCLouvain team, which specializes in oncology, discovered that cells in an acidic microenvironment (acidosis) within tumors replace glucose with lipids as an energy source in order to multiply. In collaboration with UCLouvain’s Cyril Corbet, Prof. Feron demonstrated in 2020 that these same cells are the most aggressive and acquire the ability to leave the original tumor to generate metastases. Meanwhile, Yvan Larondelle, a professor in the UCLouvain Faculty of Bioengineering, whose team is developing improved dietary lipid sources, proposed to Prof. Feron that they combine their skills in a research project, led by PhD candidate Emeline Dierge, to evaluate the behavior of tumor cells in the presence of different fatty acids.

< Please watch the age-restricted video at the source page. >

3D tumors that disintegrate within a few days thanks to the action of a well-known Omega-3 (DHA, found mainly in fish) — this is the exceptional discovery by University of Louvain. Hungry for fatty acids, tumor cells in acidosis gorge themselves on DHA but are unable to store it correctly and literally poison themselves. The result? They die. Credit: Copyright UCLouvain

Thanks to the support of the Fondation Louvain, the Belgian Cancer Foundation, and the Télévie telethon, the team quickly identified that these acidotic tumor cells responded in diametrically opposite ways depending on the fatty acid they were absorbing. Within a few weeks, the results were both impressive and surprising. “We soon found that certain fatty acids stimulated the tumor cells while others killed them,” the researchers explained. DHA literally poisons them.

A fatal overload

The poison acts on tumor cells via a phenomenon called ferroptosis, a type of cell death linked to the peroxidation of certain fatty acids. The greater the amount of unsaturated fatty acids in the cell, the greater the risk of their oxidation.

Normally, in the acidic compartment within tumors, cells store these fatty acids in lipid droplets, a kind of bundle in which fatty acids are protected from oxidation. But in the presence of a large amount of DHA, the tumor cell is overwhelmed and cannot store the DHA, which oxidizes and leads to cell death. By using a lipid metabolism inhibitor that prevents the formation of lipid droplets, researchers were able to observe that this phenomenon is further amplified, which confirms the identified mechanism and opens the door to combined treatment possibilities.

For their study, UCLouvain researchers used a 3D tumor cell culture system, called spheroids. In the presence of DHA, spheroids first grow and then implode. The team also administered a DHA-enriched diet to mice with tumors. The result: tumor development was significantly slowed compared to that in mice on a conventional diet.

This UCLouvain study shows the value of DHA in fighting cancer. “For an adult,” the UCLouvain researchers stated, “it’s recommended to consume at least 250 mg of DHA per day. But studies show that our diet provides on average only 50 to 100 mg per day. This is well below the minimum recommended intake.”

Reference: 11 June 2021, Cell Metabolism.
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmet.2021.05.016

Source

Companies that made it through the pandemic in one piece now have a major new problem: more than a quarter of their employees may leave.

What's happening: Workers have had more than a year to reconsider work-life balance or career paths, and as the world opens back up, many of them will give their two weeks' notice and make those changes they’ve been dreaming about.

“The great resignation” is what economists are dubbing it.

• Surveys show anywhere from 25% to upwards of 40% of workers are thinking about quitting their jobs.

• "I don't envy the challenge that human resources faces right now," says Anthony Klotz, an associate professor of management at Texas A&M University.

A number of colliding trends are driving the resignation boom, experts say.

• University of Michigan economist Betsey Stevenson tells Axios, "People have had a little more space to ask themselves, 'Is this really what I want to be doing?'" So some are deciding they want to work fewer hours or with more flexibility to create more time for family or hobbies.

• Others are considering switching careers entirely.

• A cruise ship staffer trained and pivoted to work in a data center because the pandemic showed her the volatility of her industry.

• An insurance broker and her restaurant manager husband both left their jobs to start a landscaping company because they realized during the pandemic that they wanted to spend more time outside.

• Some are quitting because their bosses won't let them work from home post-pandemic. Others are leaving because they miss their offices, but their companies are now hybrid or all-remote.

• "A lot of people who want to go back are finding that the office that they come back to is not the office they left behind," Klotz says.

There's not much firms can do to hold onto employees who want to switch fields. But human resources may be able to retain some workers by offering as much flexibility as possible, says Cathy Moy, chief people officer at BDO USA, a financial services company.

But, but, but: The big churn could ultimately be good for workers and employers.

• There are now a record 9.3 million open jobs in America, Axios' Felix Salmon reports. And people can still rely on unemployment insurance so they're not desperate to nab the first job offer that comes along, Stevenson says.

• "Hopefully we’ll see a lot more people in 2022 employed and stable because they're in jobs they actually like," she says.

Source

Breakthrough tech makes car battery "happy", fully charges in 10 minutes 

Breakthrough tech makes car battery "happy", fully charges in 10 minutes

We have another highly effective COVID vaccine, based on different tech

While not needed for the US, it should help with the global vaccine push.

Today, a company called Novavax announced that it had completed a large efficacy trial of its COVID-19 vaccine, and the news was good. The vaccine is highly effective, it blocked severe disease entirely, and it appeared to work against some of the more recently evolved virus variants. The company says it can produce 150 million doses per month by the end of the year, and the vaccine is stable when stored with normal refrigeration, so it could play a big part in the effort to administer vaccines outside of industrialized nations.

Different tech

So far, US citizens have had the choice of RNA-based vaccines, like the offerings from Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech, or a vaccine based on a harmless virus engineered to carry the coronavirus spike protein, as used in the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. (The AstraZeneca and Sputnik vaccines are similar to J&J's.) Outside the US, many countries have used vaccines based on an inactivated coronavirus, although these have turned out not to be very effective.

 

The Novavax vaccine uses an entirely different technology. Vaccine production starts by identifying a key gene from the pathogen of interest—the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, in this case—and inserting it into a virus that infects insect cells. Insect cells can easily be grown in culture, and they process any proteins they make in the same way that human cells do. (This processing can involve chemically linking sugars or cleaving off superfluous parts of the protein.) The activity ensures that the purified protein will be chemically identical to the spike protein found on the surface of the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself.

 

The company's description of the vaccine development from here on out is a bit vague, but it appears that the vaccine builds a large complex of proteins that includes multiple copies of the spike protein. So rather than being made up of individual dispersed copies of the spike protein, the vaccine consists of a smaller number of large complexes that have multiple copies of the spike. These complexes can be described as nanoparticles and are similar in scale to an actual virus, hypothetically enhancing the immune system's response.

 

In addition, the company mixes in a molecule called an "adjuvant." This chemical is unrelated to the protein that creates the immune response, but it seems to heighten the response regardless. In this case, the adjuvant is a sugar-containing molecule isolated from plants; it's a relative of an adjuvant that is already used as a food additive (it helps give root beer a foamy head when poured).

 

Like some other vaccines, Novavax's offering, NVX-CoV2373, is administered in two doses separated by a few weeks. Unlike the RNA vaccines, it can be stored in regular refrigerators, allowing it to be used in locations with no robust public health infrastructure. And because it relies on a very different technology, it shouldn't be in direct competition with other vaccines for most of its raw ingredients.

Promising results

The numbers released by Novavax today look very similar to the efficacy of other two-dose vaccines. The company's clinical trial enrolled nearly 30,000 people in the US and Mexico, with twice as many participating in the experimental group as in the control. There were 77 confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections, with 63 of those occurring in the placebo group, which translates to a 90 percent efficacy.

 

All 14 cases in the vaccine group were mild, while the placebo group saw 10 moderate and four severe cases. The vaccine blocked all severe infections, although some will undoubtedly occur when the vaccine is in broader use.

 

The trial included the period when the Alpha variant (formerly B.1.1.7) became the predominant form of the virus in the US. While the analysis involved a smaller number of cases, it appears that NVX-CoV2373 is also highly effective against this and other variants.

 

Side effects were generally similar to other vaccines, with headaches, fatigue, and pain at the injection site being common.

 

This all suggests that Novavax will have little trouble gaining an Emergency Use Authorization when it applies for one from the Food and Drug Administration. The company indicates it will do so in the next quarter, at which point it will be able to manufacture 100 million doses a month. That number is expected to rise to 150 million per month before the year is out.

 

The US currently has an excess of vaccine supply and has started to send doses to other countries, in some cases directly and in others via an international program set up to increase global vaccination levels. As such, the availability of an additional vaccine is unlikely to change the dynamics of vaccinations in the US. But the availability of the volumes promised by Novavax could make a massive difference to international efforts, especially given the ability of NVX-CoV2373 to be stored with basic refrigeration.

 

Correction: the cells that produce the protein used in the vaccine were incorrectly identified, and corrected freezing/refrigeration error.

We have another highly effective COVID vaccine, based on different tech

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. - Multiple packages of cocaine washed ashore on a beach at Cape Canaveral last month, the US Space Force said.

Angy Chambers, a wildlife manager for the 45th Civil Engineer Squadron, was patrolling the beach to perform a sea turtle nesting survey on May 19 when she noticed a small package wrapped tightly in plastic and tape. She thought it could be drugs and contacted the 45th Security Forces Squadron.

"While I was waiting for them to arrive, I drove a little further and noticed another package, and then another," Chambers said. "At that point, I called SFS back and suggested they bring their UTV, or Utility Terrain Vehicle, as I counted at least 18 packages."

A Brevard County Sheriff's Office narcotics agent performed a field test on one of the packages and verified that it was cocaine.

In all, 24 packages weighing nearly 30 kilograms were seized from the Cape Canaveral Space Force Station beach, the Space Force said. According to the sheriff's office, the drugs have an estimated value of approximately $1.2 million.

The packages of cocaine were turned over to Homeland Security, where they were examined for any unique markings and identifiers.

According to Homeland Security Special Agent David Castro, maritime drug traffickers will often transport bulk shipments in bales. He said the bale wrapping is sometimes destroyed during transit which causes bricks to be lost at sea and eventually recovered on the US coastline.

Source

Study used data from cell phone apps and watches, brain activity and lifestyle factors to generate predictions of depression; results could lead to individualized treatment plans for mental health

According to the National Alliance on Mental Illness and the World Health Organization, depression affects 16 million Americans and 322 million people worldwide. Emerging evidence suggests that the COVID-19 pandemic is further exacerbating the prevalence of depression in the general population. With this trajectory, it is evident that more effective strategies are needed for therapeutics that address this critical public health issue.

In a recent study, publishing in the June 8, 2021 online edition of Nature Translational Psychiatry, researchers at University of California San Diego School of Medicine used a combination of modalities, such as measuring brain function, cognition and lifestyle factors, to generate individualized predictions of depression.

The machine learning and personalized approach took into account several factors related to an individual’s subjective symptoms, such as sleep, exercise, diet, stress, cognitive performance and brain activity.

“There are different underlying reasons and causes for depression,” said Jyoti Mishra, PhD, senior author of the study, director of NEATLabs and assistant professor in the Department of Psychiatry at UC San Diego School of Medicine. “Simply put, current health care standards are mostly just asking people how they feel and then writing a prescription for medication. Those first-line treatments have been shown to be only mild to moderately effective in large trials.

“Depression is a multifaceted illness, and we need to approach it with personalized treatment whether that be therapy with a mental health professional, more exercise or a combination of approaches.”

The one-month study collected data from 14 participants with depression using smartphone applications and wearables (like smart watches) to measure mood and lifestyle variables of sleep, exercise, diet and stress, and paired these with cognitive evaluations and electroencephalography, using electrodes on the scalp to record brain activity.

The goal was not to make any comparisons across individuals, but to model the predictors of each person’s daily fluctuations in depressed mood.

The researchers developed a new machine-learning pipeline to systematically identify distinct predictors of low mood in each individual.

As an example, exercise and daily caffeine intake emerged as strong predictors of mood for one participant, but for another, it was sleep and stress that were more predictive, while in a third subject, the top predictors were brain function and cognitive responses to rewards.

“We should not be approaching mental health as one size fits all. Patients will benefit by having more direct and quantified insight onto how specific behaviors may be feeding their depression. Clinicians can leverage this data to understand how their patients might be feeling and better integrate medical and behavioral approaches for improving and sustaining mental health,” said Mishra.

“Our study shows that we can use the technology and tools that are readily available, like cell phone apps, to collect information from individuals with or at risk for depression, without significant burden to them, and then harness that information to design personalized treatment plans.”

Mishra said next steps include examining if the personalized treatment plans guided by the data and machine learning are effective.

“Our findings could have broader implications than depression. Anyone seeking greater well-being could benefit from insights quantified from their own data. If I don’t know what is wrong, how do I know how to feel better?”

Source