Brain Beauty: The Art of Neuroscience

The Beautiful Brain: The Drawings of Santiago Ramón y Cajal
by Larry W. Swanson , Eric A. Newman , Alfonso Araque and Janet M. Dubinsky
Abrams, 2017 ($40)

Often called the “father of modern neuroscience,” Santiago Ramón y Cajal was a Spanish scientist whose exquisitely detailed drawings helped to reveal the pathways, cells and structure of the brain. Born in 1852, Cajal crafted illustrations, based on painstaking observations of brain slices under the microscope, that led to major discoveries long before neuroimaging was possible. He realized, for instance, that the brain was a vast network of individual neurons—a finding that led him to earn a Nobel Prize in 1906. In this large-format book, 82 of Cajal's drawings are paired with commentary and essays from neuroscientists celebrating both the scientific value and the pure artistry of his work.

Storm in a Teacup: The Physics of Everyday Life
by Helen Czerski.
W. W. Norton, 2017 ($26.95)

In an age when any questions we have about the workings of the world are instantly answerable via Google, physicist Czerski pushes us to resist the search engine. Instead of looking up easy explanations, she says, why not learn some simple physics so that you can try to puzzle things out for yourself? Her book provides that knowledge and puts it to work, showing how the laws of physics account for daily phenomena such as why frying food makes it crispy, why drying clothes in damp weather is impossible and why you get electric shocks more often after it snows. “Knowing about some basic bits of physics turns the world into a toybox,” she writes, full of marvels that become more interesting the more we understand them. “A toaster can teach you about some of the most fundamental laws of physics, and the benefit of a toaster is that you've probably got one, and you can see it working for yourself.”

Language at the Speed of Sight: How We Read, Why So Many Can’t, and What Can Be Done about It
by Mark Seidenberg.
Basic Books, 2017 ($28.99)

In recent decades scientists have gained “remarkable consensus” on how our brain learns to read, writes neuroscientist Seidenberg. Then why, he asks, are U.S. literacy levels so low? Poverty and screen usage are big factors, but the way we teach reading is also a major part of the problem, he argues: “Very little of what we've learned about reading as scientists has had any impact on what happens in schools.” For instance, a popular strategy taught to kids who struggle to read a word suggests various guessing strategies, such as thinking of what word might fit in the sentence or looking at illustrations. But these tactics actually distract kids from learning the skills needed to phonetically decode unfamiliar words. Seidenberg reviews the latest science on reading and makes an impassioned plea for putting this knowledge to use.

Earth in Human Hands: Shaping Our Planet’s Future
by David Grinspoon.
Grand Central Publishing, 2016 ($28)

In this overview of the “Anthropocene,” the proposed name for our current geologic epoch, astrobiologist Grinspoon describes how humans are disrupting global ecosystems and places our present situation into a broader cosmic perspective. In flavorful prose, he dives deep into the history of life on Earth (and beyond) and muses on ways that geoengineering, interplanetary colonization or contact with galactic civilizations could define this human-dominated epoch just as much as climate change, overpopulation and resource scarcity. “It took 4.5 billion years for Earth to go from dead rock to space walk, from molten ball to shopping mall, from sea to me, from goo to you,” he writes. What comes next? This hybrid of a meditative memoir, a scientific primer and a call to arms presents possible answers. —Lee Billings

 

This article was originally published with the title "Recommended"

from Scientific American Content: Global

Read More

The Top-22 Air Polluters Revealed

A mere 100 facilities, out of 20,000, produced one third of U.S. industry's toxic air pollution in 2014. Another 100 released one third of industry's greenhouse gas emissions, among 7,000 installations that discharge the gas. And according to an investigation by the Center for Public Integrity that created the rankings, 22 “super-polluter” sites appeared on both lists (noted below). Many are coal-fired power plants, and some rank high because they are very large. This group is responsible for a significant chunk of U.S. industrial air pollution. (Since 2014 eight of the 178 facilities have closed, but none were super-polluters.) Researchers at the center also used census data to show that most of the 100 facilities on the toxics list are located in poor neighborhoods—where incomes are lower than the national average. The good news is that cleaning up the sites could make a big dent in toxic compounds that are implicated in respiratory illnesses and in the country's contribution to climate change. The researchers say that existing regulations are sufficient, but weak enforcement must improve.

Credit: Tiffany Farrant-Gonzalez; Sources: “America’s Super Polluters,” By Jamie Smith Hopkins. Published online by Center for Public Integrity, September 29, 2016 http://ift.tt/2idht72

This article was originally published with the title "Top Air Polluters"

from Scientific American Content: Global

Read More

Pres. Obama Wrote the Year's Most Talked-About Science Paper

Pres. Barack Obama, medical error and gravitational waves all sat atop Digital Science’s third annual Altmetric Top 100 list, which highlights 2016’s most shared scientific publications. Obama’s paper on the progress and next steps for health care reform in JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association came in first place, and received the highest Altmetric Attention Score ever.

Altmetric analyzes how articles percolate across the Web—you may have seen the little rainbow doughnut and number accompanying scientific publications. The score tracks article performance on social media sites like Facebook and Twitter as well as news outlets, Wikipedia and other forums. The increasing number of folks sharing journal articles online marks the importance of making research available and communicating it accurately to a broader audience, says Altmetric founder Euan Adie. He cautioned, however, that the Top 100 list highlights the most shared papers, not necessarily the best ones, because Altmetric does not measure positive versus negative attention. “These are just the ones that are capturing the imagination,” he says.

Credit: Amanda Montañez; Source: Altmetric Top 100 Articles of 2016

Medical science papers, unsurprisingly, occupy 49 of the 100 slots. Those relating to topics in the news, such as Zika virus and microcephaly, created lots of buzz: “Zika Virus and Birth Defects—Reviewing the Evidence for Causality,” published in The New England Journal of Medicine, came in at number six. Other high-scoring papers also covered public health topics likely to interest big audiences: a study on how income relates to life expectancy, published in JAMA, took seventh place; a JAMA Internal Medicine investigation that showed the sugar industry funded studies downplaying the effects of sugar on coronary heart disease came in fifth; and a report finding that medical error was the third leading cause of death in the U.S., published in the British Medical Journal, came in at number two. This is consistent with a Scientific American analysis of “buzzworthy” papers, published this past October, which also tilted toward the life sciences.

Obama’s paper appearing at the top of the list makes sense, given the author’s job title. But Adie thought this was a special case, noting the document was not peer-reviewed. Plus, although Obama was probably the first chief executive to have written a complete scientific paper, presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush have published opinions in academic journals in the past.

Adie notes a couple of surprises on this year’s list. “This was the first time we saw preprints from the life sciences in the Top 100,” he says. Physicists have long used the arXiv preprint servers to make research available ahead of peer review and publication, so the scientific community can see and judge work quickly. This year, a study from the preprint server bioRxiv appeared at number 21; another from PeerJ took 28th place. Adie was also surprised that this year only saw a small increase in open-access articles over last year—from 42 to 47—and that two astronomy papers appeared in the top 10, one on gravitational waves and the other on the theoretical Planet Nine. “Normally that doesn’t happen,” he says.

The list ultimately serves as a reminder that people actually read scientific papers. “When you publish a piece of research,” Adie says, “it’s not just your peers who see it. It’s potentially a much broader audience.”

from Scientific American Content: Global

Read More

Politicians' Most Bogus Science-Related Claims of 2016

SciCheck likely will have no dearth of false and misleading claims to cover next year, when a new Congress convenes and takes up the agenda of President-elect Donald Trump. The incoming president has vowed to reverse eight years of Democratic policies, and he has a Republican majority in Congress to help him accomplish his goals. 

But, for now, here are some of the more questionable science-related claims from 2016 on topics such as climate change, Zika, GMOs, marijuana and the human mind.

Climate Change

Scientific Consensus: Both the president-elect and his nominee for the head of the EPA, Scott Pruitt, made two of the most common false claims about climate change — that scientists disagree about both the connection and extent of climate change that’s due to human activity. Trump made his claims in November and Pruitt back in May. Numerous surveys of thousands of climate scientists have found that about 97 percent of them believe global warming is real and human activity is the main cause. The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change also concluded in its fifth assessment report, published in 2013, that it’s “extremely likely” that more than half of the global temperature rise since 1950 is due to human activities.

Trump on Climate Change, Nov. 23

The Facts on Trump’s EPA Nominee, Dec. 14

Climate Science, Not Pseudoscience: Ted Cruz said in January that “climate change is the perfect pseudoscientific theory because it can never, ever, ever be disproven.” That’s false. For example, if researchers found strong evidence to suggest gases like carbon dioxide don’t trap the sun’s heat (the greenhouse effect), then climate change would be disproven. But the likelihood of this occurring is minute because the greenhouse effect has been verified time and again since it was first proposed in 1824. In fact, part of that verification includes the design of heat-seeking missiles, which relies on an understanding of the greenhouse effect.

Cruz’s ‘Pseudoscientific’ Climate Claims, Feb. 1

No Warming ‘Halt’: Rep. Lamar Smith, the chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, claimed in March that a study published in Nature Climate Change “confirms the halt in global warming.” That’s false. The authors of the paper write, “We do not believe that warming has ceased.” Scientists disagree over the extent of a potential slowdown in the rate of global warming, but there is no evidence for a full-on warming halt. Smith also made a similar claim last year.

Smith Still Wrong About Warming ‘Halt,’ March 30

The Zika Epidemic

Blinded by Zika: Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid falsely claimed that Zika “affects everyone” because recent research found that it “causes people to go blind.” Temporary vision impairment is a symptom of Zika, a virus primarily spread by mosquito bite, but no adult has gone blind because of the virus. In fact, many people who contract Zika have little to no symptoms. However, it’s important to note that studies have shown that women who contracted Zika while pregnant have given birth to babies with severe vision impairment. Reid made his claim, and other similar claims, during a partisan battle over funding to combat the Zika epidemic.

Does Zika Cause Blindness?, Sept. 20

No U.S. Epidemic: In April, also during the debate over Zika funding, North Dakota Sen. Heidi Heitkamp warned about traveling in the U.S., claiming that the Zika virus will be transmitted “everywhere in the United States.” At the time, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention projected local clusters of Zika transmission on U.S. soil via mosquito bite, but not a widespread epidemic. As of Dec. 7, the CDC’s projections have held true. Puerto Rico primarily, but also the U.S. Virgin Islands, Florida, American Samoa and Texas have seen locally acquired cases, the CDC reports. Every state in the continental U.S. has seen travel-associated cases, however, which means those residents contracted the virus in areas of local transmission out-of-state.

What Zika Means for Americans, May 6

Marijuana

Legalization: Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson said in August that “marijuana-related” traffic deaths, hospital visits and school suspensions in Colorado have “not significantly” increased since the state legalized the drug. Reports do show substantial increases, but data limitations make it impossible to know how many cases were directly caused by marijuana. On traffic accidents — unlike alcohol, a positive test for marijuana doesn’t entail intoxication at the time of an accident. The drug can stay in a person’s system longer than its effects. On hospital visits — medical billing codes for marijuana signify a “marijuana-related” hospital visit in reports. But these codes don’t prove the drug was the reason for the visit, and one Colorado doctor said they are often assigned arbitrarily. On school suspensions — the Colorado Department of Education collects data on drug-related suspensions in general, so it’s not clear that the increase was due solely to marijuana.

Unpacking Pot’s Impact in Colorado, Aug. 19

Medical Research: In April, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said that “you can’t do any research about” marijuana because it’s a Schedule I drug. That’s false. Schedule I classification makes it difficult to conduct research on a substance, but not impossible. For example, the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research, based out of the University of California, San Diego, says its mission is to coordinate “rigorous scientific studies to assess the safety and efficacy of cannabis and cannabis compounds for treating medical conditions.”

Clinton on Marijuana Research, April 22

Water Issues

California’s Very Real Drought: Trump falsely suggested in May that “there is no drought” in California because the state has “plenty of water.” The state is in its fifth year of a severe “hot” drought, the type that’s expected to become more common with global warming. Trump also said water is being shoved “out to sea” to protect a “three-inch fish” at the detriment to farmers. But the state’s officials release fresh water from reservoirs primarily to avoid salt water contamination to agricultural and urban water supplies.

Trump’s Dubious Drought Claims, June 9

Fracking Fray: Sen. Jim Inhofe, chairman of the Senate environment committee, falsely claimed in November that a new report “confirms” that fracking “has not impacted drinking water” in Wyoming. The industry-funded report couldn’t reach “firm conclusions” due to a lack of water quality data before oil and gas exploration. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency also found numerous issues with the draft report, some of which weren’t resolved in the final version. For example, the report didn’t conclusively determine whether the sources of water contamination were naturally occurring or caused by humans in some cases. 

More False Claims About Fracking, Dec. 2

Ozone

Trump and His Hairspray: In May, Trump falsely said that using hairspray in his apartment, “which is all sealed,” would prevent banned ozone layer-depleting chemicals from escaping into the environment. But these chemicals, chlorofluorocarbons, would still make their way out, multiple experts said. Trump made his claim while also arguing that “hairspray’s not like it used to be” due to the CFC ban. Experts also said these global bans didn’t effect the quality of hairspray. These global bans appear to be reversing damage done to the ozone layer. The ozone layer protects the Earth’s inhabitants from the sun’s ultraviolet radiation, which is linked to skin cancer and other problems. Located between 6 to 30 miles above the planet’s surface, the ozone layer differs from ground-level ozone.

Trump on Hairspray and Ozone, May 17

Ozone and Asthma: Louisiana Rep. Ralph Abraham claimed in June that “thousands of studies” refute the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s conclusion that ground-level ozone exacerbates asthma attacks. That’s false. A link between ground-level ozone and asthma exacerbation is well-documented in the scientific literature, which both the American Lung Association and the World Health Organization acknowledge. Ground-level ozone is a component of photochemical smog, which is produced when sunlight reacts with various air pollutants. The sources of these pollutants include coal power plants, paint and cleaning products, and car exhaust.

Distorting the Ozone-Asthma Link, July 6

The Human Mind

Ineffective Torture: Trump said both in February and July that enhanced interrogation, or torture, “works.” But scientists have shown that the stress and pain induced by techniques like waterboarding can impair memory, and, therefore, inhibit a person from recalling information. Stress causes the release of hormones like cortisol, which impair the function of brain regions vital to memory formation and recall, sometimes even resulting in tissue loss. Scientists also point out that it’s difficult to know whether the information provided is true. It is not clear what policy on torture Trump will support as president. His choice for defense secretary is James N. Mattis, a retired Marine Corps general. Trump said that Mattis told him he has never found torture to be useful, the New York Times reported in November.

Trump on Torture, July 28

Implicit Bias for All: Vice President-elect Mike Pence implied in October that Hillary Clinton was wrong when she cited the fatal shooting of a black man by a black cop as a case of implicit, or unconscious, bias. But research shows African Americans are not immune to implicit bias against members of their own racial group. Implicit bias refers to unconscious and automatic features of judgment, while explicit bias entails conscious judgments. Thus, a person could explicitly believe that white and black Americans should be treated equally, but implicitly judge situations counter to that explicit belief. A group of Harvard scientists found “even numbers of Black respondents showing a pro-White bias as show a pro-Black bias.”

FactChecking the VP Debate, Oct. 5

Other Notable Claims

Ninth Month, Final Day: Trump claimed during the final presidential debate in October that under Clinton’s position on abortion, “you can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb in the ninth month on the final day.” First off, Clinton had said she was open to restrictions on late-term abortions, with exceptions for cases involving the mother’s health issues. Second, abortions on the “final day” don’t occur. Daniel Grossman, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of California, San Francisco told Politifact, “Nobody would talk about abortion on the woman’s due date. If the mother’s life was at risk, the treatment for that is delivery, and the baby survives.” Third, late-term abortions in general are rare, as only 1.2 percent of all the abortions in the United States occur after 20 weeks gestation, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

FactChecking the Final Presidential Debate, Oct. 20

Birds and Wind Farms: Trump said in May that wind farms in the U.S. “kill more than 1 million birds a year.” Reliable data are scarce, but current mean estimates range from 20,000 to 573,000 bird deaths per year. In his claim, Trump also misleadingly compared bird deaths at oil drilling operations with those at wind farms. But a 2012 Bureau of Land Management memo states that oil field production kills an estimated 500,000 to 1,000,000 birds a year. This suggests oil production alone (i.e. not including the production of coal or gas) can kill the same, if not more, birds per year than wind farms in the U.S. Even still, there are greater threats to birds than energy production, including cats and buildings.

Trump’s Hot Air on Wind Energy, June 2

Frankenfish: Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski said in March that she opposes federal approval of genetically engineered salmon “for the health of both consumers and fisheries.” But no scientific evidence suggests GE salmon will pose a significant risk to either. Scientists engineered GE salmon to grow faster than non-GE farm-raised salmon by inserting genes from two other fish into the genome of an Atlantic salmon. With these changes, the GE salmon remained nutritionally and physiologically comparable to non-GE salmon, so the Food and Drug Administration deemed GE salmon “safe to eat.” GE salmon have also been rendered sterile — meaning they can’t interbreed with wild salmon stocks. Geographical and physical confinement measures also limit the likelihood that the GE fish will escape, survive and impact wild fisheries.

False Claims About Frankenfish, March 23

Editor’s Note: SciCheck is made possible by a grant from the Stanton Foundation.

This article is reproduced with permission from FactCheck.org, which writes about false and misleading scientific claims in a feature it calls SciCheck. The article was first published on December 20, 2016.

from Scientific American Content: Global

Read More

Did Carrie Fisher's Bipolar Disorder Contribute to Her Death?

Actress and writer Carrie Fisher, who died earlier this week after suffering a cardiac event on a flight, was not only an entertainment icon, but also a prominent mental health advocate. Fisher was well known for being outspoken about her experiences with drug and alcohol addiction and bipolar disorder, which she was diagnosed with in her early twenties, and she frequently wrote about them in articles and her best-selling 2008 memoir Wishful Drinking (Simon & Schuster). Her voice countered the stigma surrounding psychiatric disorders and helped support others with similar struggles—sometimes directly.

In an advice column she wrote for The Guardian just last month Fisher offered guidance to a young adult with bipolar disorder. In it, she explains that she initially rejected the bipolar disorder diagnosis she received at the age of 24, only accepting it at age 28, “when I overdosed and finally got sober. Only then was I able to see nothing else could explain away my behavior.” She emphasized the importance of connecting with others who have the disorder, adding, “We have been given a challenging illness, and there is no other option than to meet those challenges.”

Some have conjectured that Fisher’s earlier substance abuse and struggles with her weight may have contributed to her death, with medical doctors weighing in about the cardiovascular dangers of cocaine in particular. Though these hypotheses are speculative, one possibility that has been overlooked is the influence of her bipolar disorder, which has been linked in several studies to cardiovascular disease and mortality.

This association “has been confirmed in representative and population-wide studies and approximates a two-fold increased risk—that is, persons with bipolar disorder are about twice as likely to develop or die from cardiovascular disease than would otherwise be expected,” says Jess Fiedorowicz, an associate professor of psychiatry, internal medicine and epidemiology at the University of Iowa, who published a study on this topic in 2009 in Psychosomatic Medicine. “Importantly, the onset of cardiovascular disease occurs very prematurely among people with bipolar disorder, up to 17 years earlier than in the general population,” adds Benjamin Goldstein, a child and adolescent psychiatrist at the University of Toronto, who published a related study in 2015 in Circulation.

The possible factors underlying the connection are numerous and often overlapping. “Negative lifestyle behaviors, including suboptimal nutrition, being sedentary, cigarette smoking, and excessive use of alcohol and substances are more common among people with bipolar disorder,” says Goldstein. “The distress of the mood symptoms of mania and depression that define bipolar disorder, and the life stress that occurs as a consequence of symptoms, further adds to cardiovascular risk.”

Additionally, individuals with bipolar disorder are less likely to be screened for cardiovascular disease risk factors. “Even when these risk factors are identified, they are less likely to be prescribed the appropriate treatments, and patients may be less likely to consistently adhere to them” when they are prescribed the right medications, notes Fiedorowicz. In addition, many of the medications used to treat bipolar disorder may cause adverse effects “such as weight gain, increases in triglycerides, diabetes mellitus and even sudden cardiac death due to arrhythmia,” he says. Another potential influence is bipolar disorder’s effect on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis and the autonomic nervous system, which are activated both by acute stress and by bipolar mood states.

The magnitude of the elevated heart disease risk in people with bipolar disorder, however, exceeds the effects of traditional cardiovascular risk factors, suggesting the possibility of shared causes between the two diseases. “For example, episodes of mania and depression have been linked with increased levels of inflammation, which in turn is known to increase the risk of heart disease,” explains Goldstein. “There is also evidence of problems with the function and structure of blood vessels among people with bipolar disorder, and this occurs in the brain as well as the body.” He and colleagues are currently exploring the role of tiny “microvessels” in these processes.

Future research should focus on exploring these and other possible mechanisms, as well as interventional studies regarding targeted cardiovascular risk reduction strategies that would “take into consideration barriers to optimal heart health that are unique to people with bipolar disorder,” Goldstein says. On the treatment front, there is also a “need to disseminate the types of health care delivery models that can provide integrated psychiatric and other medical care to those with bipolar and related disorders,” Fiedorowicz adds.

While Fisher fit the bill for at least several of these risk factors at different points in her life, there is no definitive way to know whether her bipolar disorder or addiction history contributed to her death. It is clear, though, that an invaluable advocate for mental health has been lost. In that November column in The Guardian, she told the advice-seeker, “Think of [your diagnosis] as an opportunity to be heroic… an emotional survival. An opportunity to be a good example to others who might share our disorder.” She certainly accomplished that in her own life.

from Scientific American Content: Global

Read More

The Most Popular Science Stories of 2016

It was a momentous year in science: astronomers detected gravitational waves for the first time, Zika virus spread around the globe and drought accompanied war to fuel a mass migration of refugees in Syria. These were among the stories our editors felt were the most important of 2016, and we invite you to read the entire collection.

But we also wanted to know which stories most captured our readers’ attention this year, so we looked at the data. Here is a list of the two most visited articles in each of our core topic areas. And because U.S. election news led the headlines in 2016, scroll down to see our top five stories about President-elect Donald Trump.

Space and Physics

1. Hints of new, exotic particles observed at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider stand to shake up foundational ideas in physics.
Read Here: Is Particle Physics About to Crack Wide Open?

2. A member of the Cassini mission to Saturn and a science writer made the case that one of Saturn's frigid moons is humans’ best option for an extraterrestrial home (sorry, Mars).
Read Here: Let's Colonize Titan

Sustainability and Climate

1. Faced with the rigors of a changing climate, Israel turned its drought-inflicted water deficit into a surplus with a string of new desalination plants.
Read Here: Israel Proves the Desalination Era Is Here

2. A study published in October showed that the polar vortex is shifting toward Europe, raising the potential for icy weather to dip into lower latitudes this winter.
Read Here: Dreaded Polar Vortex May Be Shifting

Mind and Brain

1. A long-running investigation of exceptional youths revealed what it takes to produce a whiz kid.
Read Here: How to Raise a Genius: Lessons from a 45-Year Study of Supersmart Children

2. New research is showing that female children with autism often display unique traits, leading many to be misdiagnosed.
Read Here: Autism—It’s Different in Girls

Technology

1. Researchers devised a new approach to harvesting superstrong fabrics—some even able to conduct electricity.
Read Here: Silkworms Spin Super-Silk after Eating Carbon Nanotubes and Graphene

2. In April some of the top minds in physics gathered to debate, in seriousness, whether human existence may just part of an alien's computer program.
Read Here: Are We Living in a Computer Simulation?

Health and Medicine

1. Scientists gathered more evidence that a widespread parasitic infection can alter human mood and behavior.
Read Here: Rage Disorder Linked with Parasite Found in Cat Feces

2. Even mild concussions sustained during recreational athletics or other activities might be more detrimental than anyone anticipated.
Read Here: A Single Concussion May Triple the Long-Term Risk of Suicide

Election 2016

Of course, the biggest news of the year—even for science—was the election of businessman and reality TV star Donald J. Trump as the 45th president of the U.S. Here are our top five stories about Trump’s successful quest for the Oval Office.

In the lead up to the election, Scientific American evaluated the candidates’ knowledge and positions on STEM issues.
Read Here: Grading the Presidential Candidates on Science

One of our bloggers, psychologist Scott Barry Kaufman, conducted an early assessment of Trump's personality and the true motivation behind his actions.
Read Here: Donald Trump's Real Ambition

In September Trump appointed a notorious climate change doubter, Myron Ebell, as the head of his Environmental Protection Agency transition team.
Read Here: Trump Picks Top Climate Skeptic to Lead EPA Transition

As evidence of Trump’s troubling views on science, Scientific American published a collection of his tweets and other public commentary.
Read Here: Trump's Views on Science Are Shockingly Ignorant

Once the surprising election results were in, one of the country’s most renowned journalists issued a call to action.
Read Here: Dan Rather: Now, More Than Ever, We Must Stand Up for Science

from Scientific American Content: Global

Read More

How Alcohol Affects the Body in Cold Weather

Popping a bottle of champagne during a New Year's Eve bash may be a tradition, but drinking in excess while ringing in 2017 can be especially dangerous in cold weather.

Liquor can help you "feel" warmer as blood vessels on the skin's surface open, according to the University of Rochester Medical Center. However, that "feeling" of warmth does not mean your body temperature will be affected. You will still be just as likely to get frostbite or hypothermia.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advises people to abstain from caffeinated and alcoholic beverages while in the cold since "they cause your body to lose heat more rapidly."

Dr. Noah Rosen, director of Northwell Health's Headache Center in Great Neck, New York, said sipping a stiff whiskey drink may sound like a good idea to counteract cold temperatures, but it will only raise your blood alcohol level.

"It's a sensation of warmth but it's not actually increasing core body temperature," Rosen told ABC News.

For those with heart conditions, drinking in cold weather can be hazardous since people may be under additional strain from the cold and not realize it, the American Heart Association warns.

"Alcohol may increase a person’s sensation of warmth and may cause them to underestimate the extra strain their body is under in the cold," the AHA explained on its website.

from ABC News: Health

Read More