News Feeds

As air temperatures stay elevated through fall months, people may still want clothes that cool them down while outside, especially if they live in cities that stay warmer than rural landscapes. Researchers who previously demonstrated a cooling fabric coating now report on additional tests of a treated polyester fabric. Fabric treated with the team's chalk-based coating kept the air underneath up to 6 degrees Fahrenheit cooler in warmer urban environments.

Researchers have developed a new precision AI tool to identify hidden cases of long COVID from patient medical records. Their new approach was more accurate than tools that look only at diagnostic codes, and found that 22.8 percent of the population experience symptoms of long COVID, a greater figure than previous estimates that may be less biased and more representative of national trends, according to the study's authors.

The dividing line between stars and planets is that stars have enough mass to fuse hydrogen into helium to produce their own light, while planets aren’t massive enough to produce core fusion. It’s generally a good way to divide them, except for brown dwarfs. These are bodies with a mass of about 15–80 Jupiters, so they are large enough to fuse deuterium but can’t generate helium. Another way to distinguish planets and stars is how they form. Stars form by the gravitational collapse of gas and dust within a molecular cloud, which allows them to gather mass on a short cosmic timescale. Planets, on the other hand, form by the gradual accumulation of gas and dust within the accretion disk of a young star. But again, that line becomes fuzzy for brown dwarfs.

The problem arises in that, if brown dwarfs form within a molecular cloud like stars, they aren’t massive enough to form quickly. If a cloud of gas and dust has enough mass to collapse under its own weight, it has enough mass to form a full star. But if brown dwarfs form like planets, they would have to accumulate mass incredibly quickly. Simulations of planet formation show it is difficult for a planet to form with a mass of more than a few Jupiters. So what gives? The answer may lie in what are known as Jupiter-mass binary objects, or JuMBOs.

The Orion nebula is a stellar nursery. Credit: NASA, ESA, M. Robberto

JuMBOs are binary objects where each component has a mass between 0.7 and 13 Jupiter masses. If they form like planets, they should be extremely rare, and if they form like binary stars, they should have more mass. Recent observations by the JWST of the Orion nebula cluster discovered 540 free-floating Jupiter mass objects, so-called rogue planets. This was surprising in and of itself, but more surprising was the fact that 42 of them were JuMBOs. Far from being rare, they make up nearly 8% of these rogue objects. So how do they form?

One clue lies in their orbital separation. The components of JuMBOs are most commonly separated by a distance of 28–384 AU. This is similar to that of binary stars with components around the mass of the Sun, which typically are in a range of 50–300 AU. Binary stars are extremely common. More common than single stars like the Sun. The environment of stellar nurseries, such as the Orion nebula, is also extremely intense. Massive stars that form first can blast nearby regions with ionizing radiation. Given how common JuMBOs are, it is likely they began as binary stars, only to have much of their masses blasted away by photo-erosion. Rather than being binary planets, they are the failed remnants of binary stars.

This could also explain why so many rogue planets have super-Jupiter masses. The same intense light that would cause photo-erosion would also tend to push them out of star systems.

Reference: Diamond, Jessica L., and Richard J. Parker. “Formation of Jupiter-Mass Binary Objects through photoerosion of fragmenting cores.” The Astrophysical Journal 975.2 (2024): 204.

The post An Explanation for Rogue Planets. They Were Eroded Down by Hot Stars appeared first on Universe Today.

An analysis of thousands of cognitive tests carried out by chimpanzees finds that the number of spectators influenced their performance in different ways depending on the difficulty of the task

Asian elephants at Berlin Zoo show impressive skill when using a hose as a tool, and even appear to sabotage each other by stopping the flow of water

In 2013, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations published a report titled Edible Insects: Future Prospects of Insects as Food and Feed.1 Despite being downloaded over seven million times and receiving widespread publicity, the report did not generate much controversy. This was likely because the consumption of insects was seen as an unfamiliar practice associated with developing countries in the tropics, and the idea of incorporating bugs into Western diets was just not taken seriously. However, that perception has been changing recently. Several edible insect products have been declared safe by international and national food safety organizations in Western countries. In response, critical coverage has emerged on social media, claiming that edible insects pose a threat to public health and even to national identities.

Here are a few examples of how some politicians and journalists reacted to the legalization of insects as food:

• A senator from the Republican party in France warned the Senate on January 25, 2024 that French people would be led to “eat insects without their knowledge.”2
• The Hungarian agriculture minister warned that “traditional eating habits may be in danger.”2
• A former interior minister and leader of the ABV party in Bulgaria described allowing insects in food as a “crime against Europe” and claimed it showed a “readiness to kill our European children.”2
• In 2023, the Italian agricultural minister said of the use of edible insects to make traditional dishes such as pasta and pizza, “it’s fundamental that these flours are not confused with food made in Italy.”3
• In the Netherlands in 2023, a member of parliament posted on social media that “we will not eat the bugs,” while seen pouring mealworms from a bag onto the ground.4
• In the UK, a news article read, “Regulations are imposed (not debated) by the European Commission. In this case, the powdered bug was imposed into the food chain of around half a billion people without debate.”5
• In the U.S., a newspaper article warned, “Biden admin shells out taxpayer dollars on getting Americans to eat trash-fed bugs.”6

This aversion has been connected to conspiratorial claims about a shadowy global elite that aims to control the world’s population. The World Economic Forum (Davos) has been singled out, with claims that elites such as heads of state and business leaders want people to eat bugs instead of meat to combat food insecurity.7

The main narratives surrounding these claims include:

• The European Union is forcing its citizens to eat insects against their will.
• Insects are poisonous.
• Insect-derived ingredients are added to food because of the dramatic consequences of sanctions imposed on Russia in light of the war in Ukraine.8

Is there any truth to such allegations? These claims are largely false. Since 2021, several insect products have been approved in the European Union as safe for human consumption,9 but there is no mandate forcing citizens to eat them. The safety of these products is ensured through rigorous testing by food safety organizations. Additionally, the move towards including insects in the food supply is motivated by concerns about sustainability and food security, rather than by sanctions against Russia. So, why is there such significant resistance to eating insects?

Why are we reluctant to accept insects as food?

The numerous statements by politicians and journalists quoted above, and similar sentiments shared by the public, are primarily rooted10 in two underlying reasons:

1. Food Neophobia: The reluctance to eat (or the avoidance of) new foods.
2. Disgust: The instinctual avoidance of food considered potentially to cause death or disease and because “creepy-crawly” things are, well, disgusting.

Although these are closely related, disgust is the more significant barrier to acceptance of insect consumption. Food neophobia can be mitigated with information about the food item’s nutritional value, safety, and sustainability. Disgust is harder to overcome as it is based on emotion rather than rationality.11 A related reason why insects are not commonly eaten in the Western world is their association with dirt, death, disease, and contamination.

Food Safety and Nutritional Value

The assumption by Westerners that insects cannot be eaten and are merely survival food in tropical countries is more of a bias than a fact. In tropical regions, over 1,500 insect species are consumed because the local population considers them nutritious, tasty, and easy to procure, rather than solely due to low living standards. In North America and Europe, insects have not been a customary food item primarily because they are not available in sufficient quantities to be considered food. In contrast, in tropical regions, larger insects are available year-round and can be easily harvested due to their tendency to occur in clumped distributions. Insects do occasionally appear in large numbers in temperate zones—for example, in the U.S., the 2024 simultaneous emergence of 13- and 17-year cycle cicadas, which happens only once every 221 years, sparked interest in using them as food.12 Historically, until the mid-1900s insects such as cockchafers were both a common pest and a delicacy in France and Germany.13

To make edible insects available in Western markets, they need to be reared under controlled conditions on farms. For human consumption, species such as mealworms, crickets, and locusts are used, while fly species such as the black soldier fly are used for animal feed because they can be reared on various organic side streams. And there’s an additional benefit: with 30 percent of food and agricultural produce going to waste,14 using these fly species could contribute to a self-sustaining economy. The market for edible insects as animal feed is expected to grow from about $7 billion in 2023 to $116 billion by 2033.15 This growth is being driven by the increasing prices for conventional feed ingredients such as fishmeal and soybean meal, whose sustainability is in question.16 Most insect-based ingredients are used as feed for animals (pets, fish, chickens, and pigs), while insects for human consumption remain a niche market, expected to grow from $650 million in 2023 to over $1 billion by 2033.17

Conspiracy Theories

Conspiracy theories often highlight the perceived food safety risks associated with consuming insects. The European Union requires that any insect intended for food first must be screened by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). This rigorous process takes considerable time and thoroughly evaluates all aspects of food safety. While several insect products have been approved, they carry a warning regarding allergies. Individuals allergic to seafood or house dust mites should be cautious due to potential cross-reactivity, as these groups are taxonomically similar to insects. Consequently, this risk must be shown on the product label, along with a clear statement that the product contains insects.

Conspiracy theories also mention the alleged danger of consuming chitin, the material composing the exoskeleton of insects. Chitin can be present in food products containing whole insects, as the processing methods—decontamination, drying, and grinding—do not remove it. However, when insect protein (meal) is used, it is often separated from fats and chitin. Even when chitin is present, it is unlikely to be harmful and may even offer health benefits.18, 19 Insect products are rich in antioxidants and essential minerals such as zinc and iron, which are often deficient in large segments of the human population, and can cause conditions such as anemia.

It is challenging to provide general numbers regarding nutritional value of insects, because they depend on various factors such as the insects’ diet and other biotic and abiotic elements. However, insect products are generally as nutritious as, or even more nutritious than, meat products.20

Are insects the future of food?

There are many misconceptions about the use of edible insects, often reinforced by negative associations. Insects provide crucial ecosystem services, such as pollination, valued at over 150 billion U.S. dollars—10 percent of the value of global agricultural production for human consumption.21 Additionally, insects play important roles as decomposers and in the biocontrol of agricultural pests. Many bird species, including chickens, as well as various fish species, naturally consume insects. Non-human primates also eat insects, as do hundreds of millions of people worldwide in tropical regions.22

This article appeared in Skeptic magazine 29.3
Buy print edition
Buy digital edition
Subscribe to print edition
Subscribe to digital edition
Download our app

The publication of the 2013 edition of the Food and Agriculture Organization’s Statistical Yearbook triggered enormous publicity by highlighting the environmental benefits, nutritional value, and safety of using insects as food and feed. This coincided with increasing awareness that changes in our food habits were necessary. Eighty percent of all agricultural land worldwide is used to produce dairy and meat products.23 It is estimated that this land area will not be enough to satisfy the increasing demand for these products due to the growing world population and improving living standards. Additionally, the environmental impact of meat and dairy production is substantial, accounting for about 15 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions and almost two-thirds of all ammonia emissions.24 Water and land use requirements are also very high. Farming edible insects is environmentally better on all fronts, while their nutritional values are similar to those of conventional meats.25

The idea of eating insects is gradually gaining traction in Western countries. Strategies such as targeting more adventurous eaters, incorporating insect ingredients into familiar products, and providing information about food safety, nutrition, and sustainability may help shift public perception and gradually convince more people that insects deserve a place on the menu.26

Resistance to this new food is not unexpected, given that insects have never been considered a regular food ingredient in the West. But if insect products are proven to be safe, nutritious, tasty, and more sustainable than meat, perhaps we should reconsider our food habits?

About the Author

Arnold van Huis is a Professor Emeritus of Tropical Entomology at Wageningen University & Research in the Netherlands. From 1974 to 1979, he worked for the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) in Nicaragua. He is the author of over 300 scientific papers and co-author of The Insect Cookbook: Food for a Sustainable Planet (Columbia University Press). In 2014, together with FAO, he organized the first conference, Insects to Feed the World, attended by 450 participants from 45 countries. He is the chief editor of the Journal of Insects as Food and Feed.

References

1. https://bit.ly/3zApUov
2. https://bit.ly/3LjQN2J
3. https://bit.ly/3WchjkG
4. https://bit.ly/3zyYu2x
5. https://bit.ly/3RZyLXi
6. https://bit.ly/4eY2Hg4
7. https://bit.ly/3LeJ1XV
8. https://bit.ly/4bJsvdm
9. https://bit.ly/4bDau0f
10. https://bit.ly/4eTWfXC
11. https://bit.ly/3RVKvtR
12. https://bit.ly/3xRpI3S
13. https://is.gd/g8DxY7
14. https://is.gd/242sgQ
15. https://is.gd/umZWVz
16. https://is.gd/P6uLeZ
17. https://is.gd/Xbe2oq
18. https://is.gd/I26KSg
19. https://is.gd/B5fnKU
20. https://is.gd/cvOHhe
21. https://is.gd/BP3xpt
22. https://is.gd/cbnDRq
23. https://is.gd/xUitAW
24. https://is.gd/soBRe7
25. https://is.gd/7qQbDj
26. https://is.gd/PdqffL

Allowing for moves that create quantum superpositions makes a quantum version of a Rubik’s cube incredibly complex, but not impossible to solve

In order to figure out how something came from nothing, we first need to explore the different types of nothing

A new space-based telescope aims to address a key solar mystery.

A new experiment will explore a region of the Sun that’s tough to see from the surface of the Earth. The solar corona—the elusive, pearly white region of the solar atmosphere seen briefly during a total solar eclipse—is generally swamped out by the dazzling Sun. Now, the Coronal Diagnostic Experiment (CODEX) will use a coronagraph to create an ‘artificial eclipse’ in order to explore the poorly understood middle corona region of the solar atmosphere.

CODEX launched as part of the cargo manifest on SpaceX’s Cargo Dragon this week, on mission CRS-31. CRS-31 arrived at the ISS and docked at the Harmony forward port of the station on November 5th.

CODEX is a partnership between NASA’s Goddard Spaceflight Center, Italy’s National Institute for Astrophysics (INAE) and KASI (Korea Astronomy and Space Science Institute). Technical expertise for the project was provided by the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory (NRL).

CODEX will be mounted on the EXPRESS (Expedite the Processing of Experiments to the Space Station) Logistics Carrier Site 3 (ELC-3) on the ISS.

An animation of CODEX on the ISS. NASA Why Use Coronagraphs

Coronagraphs work by blocking out the Sun with an occulting disk. The disk used in CODEX is about as wide as an orange. Though coronagraphs can work on Earth, placing them in space is an easy way to eliminate unwanted light due to atmospheric scattering.

The solar corona, as imaged by the High Altitude Observatory’s coronagraph. UCAR/NCAR.

Targeting the middle region of the corona is crucial, as it’s thought to be the source of the solar wind. But what heats this region to temperatures actually hotter than the surface below? This rise is in the order of a million degrees, versus 6000 degrees Celsius for the solar photosphere. The same unknown process accelerates particles to tremendous speeds of over a million kilometers an hour.

CODEX seeks to address this dilemma, and will measure Doppler shifts in charged particles at four filtered wavelengths. The instrument will need to center and track the Sun from its perch on the exterior of the ISS. To this end, this must occur while speeding around the Earth once every 90 minutes. CODEX will be able to see the Sun roughly half of the time, though seasons near either solstice will allow for near-continuous views.

CODEX will work with NASA’s Parker Solar Probe and ESA’s Solar Orbiter (SolO) in studying this coronal heating dilemma. In addition, it will also join the Solar Heliospheric (SOHO’s) LASCO C2 and C3 coronagraph in space. Another new coronagraph instrument in space is the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration’s CCOR-1 (Compact Coronagraph) aboard the GOES-19 satellite in geosynchronous orbit.

A Solar Wind Riddle

“CODEX measures the plasma’s temperature, speed and density around the whole corona between 3 and 10 solar radii, and will measure how those parameters evolve in time, providing new constraints on all theories of coronal heating,” Niicholeen Viall (GFSC-Solar Physics Laboratory) told Universe Today. “Parker Solar Probe measures these plasma parameters in the upper corona (getting as close as 10 solar radii) in great detail, but it makes those measurements in situ (from one one location in space and time) and only briefly that close to the Sun.”

The CODEX team with the instrument, ahead of launch. Credit: CODEX/NASA.

The goal of CODEX is to provide a holistic view of solar wind activity. “In contrast, CODEX provides a global view and context of these plasma parameters and their evolution,” says Viall. “Additionally, CODEX extends the measurements much closer to the Sun than Parker Solar Probe (PSP), linking the detailed measurements made at PSP at 10 solar radii through the middle corona, down to ~3 solar radii, closer to their source. This is important because most of the coronal heating has already taken place by 10 solar radii, where PSP measures.”

A Dual Mystery

Two theories vie to explain the solar heating mystery. A first says that tangled magnetic fields are converted into thermal power. These are in turn fed into the corona as bursts of energy. Another says that oscillations known as Alfvén waves inject energy in a sort of feedback loop in the lower corona.

“Solar Orbiter has (an) EUV (Extreme ultraviolet) and white light imager that could be used to connect the CODEX measurements to their sources on the Sun,” says Viall.

Understanding this region and the source of the solar wind is crucial to predicting space weather. This is especially vital when the Sun sends powerful corona mass ejections our way. Not only can these spark low latitude aurorae, but these can also impact communications and pose a hazard to satellites and astronauts in space.

“CODEX is similar to all coronagraphs, in that they block light out from the photosphere to see the much fainter corona.” Says Viall. CODEX’s field of view has overlap with, but is different than SOHO’s coronagraphs and CCOR. The largest difference though, is that CODEX has special filters that can provide the temperature and speed of the solar wind, in addition to the density measurements that white light coronagraphs always make.”

The Past (and Future) of Coronagraphs in Space

Furthermore, there’s also a history of coronagraphs aboard space stations. This goes all the way back to the white-light coronagraph aboard Skylab in the early 1970s.

Looking to the future, more coronagraphs are headed space-ward. ESA’s solar-observing Proba-3 launches at the end of November. Proba-3 will feature the first free-flying occulting disk as part of the mission. PUNCH (the Polarimeter to UNify the Corona and Heliosphere) will feature four micro-sat orbiters. The mission will rideshare launch with NASA’s SPHEREx mission early next year.

“PUNCH is a white light coronagraph and set of heliospheric imagers that together image from six solar radii out through the inner heliosphere.” Says Viall. PUNCH will be able to watch the structures that CODEX identifies as they as they evolve and are modulated father out in the heliosphere.”

Fianlly, astronomers can also use coronagraph-style instruments to image exoplanets directly. The Nancy Grace Roman Space telescope (set to launch in 2027) will feature one such instrument.

It will be exciting to see CODEX in action, as it probes the mysteries of the solar wind.

The post CODEX Coronagraph Heads to the ISS on Cargo Dragon appeared first on Universe Today.

We are in dire need of photos, dear readers. If you have good wildlife snaps, please send them in. Thanks! Today we have a contribution on falconry (or rather, “hawkery”) from ecologist Susan Harrison of UC Davis. Her notes and captions are indented, and you can enlarge the photos by clicking on them.

Hunting with the Sky Wolves  

One sunny October morning, I accompanied two expert falconers and their Harris’s Hawks (Parabuteo unicinctus) on a jackrabbit (Lepus californicus) hunt.   I’d met Don and Pete when they displayed their hawks at at a native seed farm open house last spring.  As leaders of the California Hawking Club they work to educate the public about falconry. It’s a demanding and highly regulated sport, practiced by only about 4,000 licensed falconers in the US.  Here is poignant advice from the CHC’s website: “Will you, can you, commit part of your waking hours to a creature who at the very best of times will merely tolerate your presence, is as affectionate as a stone, and at the worst of times will cause you heartache and puncture wounds?”

Harris’s Hawks are favored for falconry because they are unusually social raptors. Uniquely, they hunt in groups and have thus been nicknamed “wolves of the sky.” Our expedition involved a trio of different-aged siblings, although Harris’s Hawks need not be kin to hunt together.

Released from their travel crates, Jenny, Zeva, and Shooter quickly flew to a power line and began scouting the fields:

Jenny wears orange jesses (leg straps).  Note that she also sports a GPS transmitter, as do the other hawks, enabling the falconers to follow them on foot guided by a smartphone app.   Unlike true falcons, Harris’s Hawks do not typically fly many miles in the course of a hunt.

Jenny:

Cooperative hunting by the ‘wolves of the sky’ is thrilling to watch.  The hawk who first spots the prey chirps to alert the other hawks and initiates the chase. (If the falconers happen to see the animal first, they helpfully call ‘hoo-hoo-hoo’ to the hawks.) The other hawks then see the speeding prey and fly ahead, coordinating their paths to intercept it.  Female Harris’s Hawks are larger than males and will often make the killing pounce.

The first rabbit was killed so quickly that we didn’t see it happen.  Don and Pete bagged the rabbit so the hunt could continue.  Note the hawks resting in the shade at lower left:

The falconers then raised a T-perch and two hawks hopped aboard, allowing them to sit and look for prey as the group moved around.  As we traversed orchards and fields, the hawks frequently came and went from the perch, as well as pausing in trees:

A second rabbit soon rocketed out of the orchard, which was a fatal decision on its part.  Moving far faster than me or my camera, the hawk trio took it to the ground a few hundred yards away:

After handing the hawks meat treats from a bag, Don took the rabbit to the car to serve up lunch:

Spritzing their meal with water helps the hawks stay hydrated:

The hawk on the left, Abby, is a young trainee on a lightweight tether called a creance.   She didn’t get to hunt this time, but did get to join in the feast:

Their hunt and meal finished, the hawks permitted themselves to be returned to their travel crates:

The rewards of being a falconer, again from the CHC website:

“Are you ready to be one of that elite band of hunters in the most awesome sport on the face of the earth? Are you ready to have people see you with awe, amazement and sometimes anger? Are you ready to be the absolute center of attention whenever you carry your hawk on your fist? Are you ready for that incredible rush when that wild creature first returns to you, on its own and able to fly free but decides to come to you instead?”

Some falconers and their birds are not sport hunters but pest-control professionals, whose job is to keep away nuisance birds such as starlings. The most famous of these is Rufus the Hawk, who for 16 years has kept pigeons off the Wimbledon tennis courts.

Rufus the Hawk (from The Telegraph; photo credit: Getty):

Australia is planning a total ban on social media for children under 16 years old. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese argues that it is the only way to protect vulnerable children from the demonstrable harm that social media can do. This has sparked another round of debates about what to do, if anything, about social media.

When social media first appeared, there wasn’t much discussion or recognition about the potential downsides. Many viewed it as one way to fulfill the promise of the web – to connect people digitally. It was also viewed as the democratization of mass communication. Now anyone could start a blog, for example, and participate in public discourse without having to go through editors and gatekeepers or invest a lot of capital. And all of this was true. Here I am, two decades later, using my personal blog to do just that.

But the downsides also quickly became apparent. Bypassing gatekeepers also means that the primary mechanism for quality control (for what it was worth) was also gone. There are no journalistic standards on social media, no editorial policy, and no one can get fired for lying, spreading misinformation, or making stuff up. While legacy media still exists, social media caused a realignment in how most people access information.

In the social media world we have inadvertently created, the people with the most power are arguably the tech giants. This has consolidated a lot of power in the hands of a few billionaires with little oversight or regulations. Their primary tool for controlling the flow of information is computer algorithms, which are designed to maximize engagement. You need to get people to click and to stay on your website so that you can feed them ads. This also created a new paradigm in which the user (that’s you) is the product – apps and websites are used to gather information about users which are then sold to other corporations, largely for marketing purposes. In some cases, like the X platform, and individual can favor their own content and perspective, essentially turning a platform into a propaganda machine. Sometimes an authoritarian government controls the platform, and can push public discourse in whatever direction they want.

Perhaps worse, if the only feedback loop for algorithms is engagement, then this creates an interesting psychological experiment. What drives engagement is extremism, outrage, and reinforcing prejudices. This has resulted in a few derivative phenomena, including echochambers. It became trivial, and almost automatic, for spaces to emerge on social media that reinforce a particular world view. Those who do not comply are deemed “trolls” and are banned. Rather than having a shared reality of core facts, people are largely isolated in cocoons of ideological purity. The result was increasing division – each half of the country (politically speaking) cannot imagine how the other half can possibly believe what they do.

In addition getting people to engage meant feeding them increasingly radical content, which had the result of radicalizing a lot of people. This resulted in the rise of lunatic ideas like flat-eatherism, and conspiracy theories like QAnon. It also supercharged the spread of misinformation, and provided a convenient mechanism for the deliberate spread of disinformation. Bad actors and authoritarian governments quickly seized upon this opportunity.

There is also another layer here -mental health. Obsessively engaging online results in fomo, bullying, low self-esteem, and depression. This is exacerbated by the fact that the layer of protection afforded by social media allows for psychopaths, predators, and other bad actors to roam freely.

So I can understand the feeling that by allowing young children to engage on social media is like throwing our children to the wolves, with predictable negative effects. But the question remains – what do we do about it? Australia is planning an experiment of their own, taking a bold step to outright ban social media use for children under 16. There is already a lot of pushback against this idea. In an open letter from 100 academics, they argue that banning is a blunt tool, and that it will leave children more vulnerable. They will not learn the skills to be able to navigate social media, they argue. They suggest that other methods would be better, without getting into too much detail about what those methods might be. The details of the banning also have to be worked out – how will it be enforced?

It is a genuine dilemma. There is no real solution, only different trade-offs. It is certainly worth having the conversation about what the options and trade-off might be. Doing nothing is one option – just let the experiment play itself out, with the idea that society will adapt. While I think this will happen to some degree, we may not like where we end up. My problem with this approach is that it assumes that things will play out organically. Rather, powerful actors (tech giants, powerful corporations, and governments) will exploit the system to their own advantage and to the detriment of the public. We may have just provided the tools for authoritarian governments to exert ultimate control over society. It may not be a coincidence that democracies are in retreat around the world.

But even without an authoritarian thumb on the scale, misinformation seems to have a significant advantage in the world of social media. Perhaps even worse, we seem to be heading for a world in which truth is irrelevant. I spend a lot of time on TikTok, for example, trying to spread a little science and critical thinking. The platform has lots of good science communication on hit, and lots of wholesome entertainment. But it is also overwhelmed with nonsense, including misinformation and disinformation. But perhaps the dominant trend is for something that is not so much misinformation but that is completely unconcerned with reality. Many videos are purely performative, to the point that I cannot figure out if the person making the video actually believes anything they say. It’s as if it doesn’t matter – it’s all about engagement. The very concept that one factual claim may be more reliable than an opposing claim seems anathema. It’s all opinion, and all that matters is clicks. Any argument otherwise is immediately dismissed as a conspiracy, or mere elitism.

We may already be living in the post-truth hellscape that critics predicted social media would lead to. I don’t think a ban is likely to be the solution, but I welcome the experiment. If Australia enacts the ban, we need to pay close attention to what results. Even if there are some net positive outcomes, it is not likely to be the only needed solution. We need to start talking more seriously about what measures should be taken to reign in some of the worse aspects of social media.  Also AI is about to supercharge everything, giving even more power spreaders of misinformation. I liken to an industry that is dumping tons of toxic substances into the environment. I don’t think we should just sit back and see what happens.

The post The Social Media Dilemma first appeared on NeuroLogica Blog.

Dangerous radiation reaches Mars at levels we aren't exposed to on Earth, which makes the Red Planet a particularly dangerous place to be during pregnancy

Doctors who are concerned about members of our profession enabling powerful anti-vaxx disinformation agents should speak up before it's too late. But its probably too late already.

The post Robert Kennedy Jr. & His Doctor Friends May Just Be Getting Started first appeared on Science-Based Medicine.

Chemists break down barriers between labs and institutions to join forces for a new way of doing organic synthesis.

Mechanical engineers have developed a system of artificial cilia capable of monitoring mucus conditions in human airways to better detect infection, airway obstruction, or the severity of diseases like Cystic Fibrosis (CF), Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases (COPD) and lung cancer.

Mechanical engineers have developed a system of artificial cilia capable of monitoring mucus conditions in human airways to better detect infection, airway obstruction, or the severity of diseases like Cystic Fibrosis (CF), Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases (COPD) and lung cancer.

Scientists are developing a formula for success -- by studying how a new type of battery fails. The team's goal is the design for long-term storage of wind and solar energy, which are produced intermittently, enabling their broader use as reliable energy sources for the electric grid.

An AI model could accurately identify goats in pain, opening up better treatment opportunities for animals and non-verbal patients.

Researchers now reveal how various physical manipulations of graphene, such as layering and twisting, impact its optical properties and conductivity.

Scientists have created a robot that can learn tasks like cleaning a washbasin just by watching humans. A special sponge with sensors is used to show the robot how to clean. Using an advanced machine learning system, the robot learns how it is supposed to behave and can apply this knowledge to cleaning different washbasins.