Seeing the Changes 1129

Winter heliotrope (Petasites fragrans) attempted to follow the sun in Loughor.

Home on the Range?

The recent suggestion to UK poultry keepers that they move their birds inside to reduce the risk of exposure to Bird 'flu from infected wild birds raises some interesting questions (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/07/bird-flu-warning-keepers-told-to-keep-poultry-iside). There is no doubt that the disease has caused havoc with populations of farmed birds in a range of European countries and that this is an appropriate response to the threat. I find it strange, however, that some of the flocks are apparently still referred to as 'free range'.

Caesarianing the Opportunity?

There has been recent debate about whether the use of Caesarian sectioning might produce a change in human morphology as it allows women with relatively narrow pelvises to give birth, potentially passing on this property to succeeding generations (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/07/caesarian--sections-mother-blaming-small_pelvises). It does not seem to me to be very likely that this will have a major effect as not all such sections are to enable the relatively large-headed baby to pass through the pelvic opening (cosmetic and emergency factors may also be involved). I also suspect that inheritance of a narrow pelvis is not down to a simple gene/ combination of genes (and, pretty obviously, the baby has 2 parents). One might also mention that any medical correction (e.g. Glasses or contact lenses for myopia) would improve the possibility of passing on these features to the next generation but we don't generally agonise about this. In general, diversity is biologically useful.

Cutting Down Lofty

News that the Giraffe has now been placed on the red list as being in danger of extinction (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/dec/08/giraffe-red-list-vulnerable-species-extinction). There has being a 40% reduction in the numbers of such animals in the wild largely as consequences of habitat destruction and local wars. It seems likely that climate change will lead to even more marked declines in the numbers of this animal (along with many more organisms?).

Seeing the Changes 1128

A Western hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus) dozes by a fence in Loughor after a very sharp frost.

Wind of Change?

I must admit that I don't normally take my news from this end of the spectrum but there is something deeply concerning about the Trumpster reportedly focusing his main attention on the UK in terms of trying to remove the distant wind-farms that he claims 'blight' his recently-created Scottish golf course (www.express.co.uk/news/politics/734195/Donald-trump-Nigel-Farage-Scottish-wind-farms). This is apparently from a US President-elect who reportedly a) believes that climate change is a scam invented by the Chinese; b) has promised to abandon the Paris (already lowest denominator?) accord on greenhouse gas emissions; c) wants to boost coal mining in the US and d) is a shareholder in Arctic oil pipelines. I think we can forget limiting things to a 2 degrees Centigrade temperature rise.

Cryonics All the Way to the Bank

The debate about the ethics surrounding the legal case of 14-year old UK girl with cancer who wanted to be preserved cryogenically in the hope of being cured in the future continues to rage (https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/nov/18/the-cryonics-dilemma-will-deep-frozen-bodies-be-fit-for-new-life). One can understand people 'grasping at straws' but a) there is very little evidence that re-animation of multicellular mammalian tissue (especially the brain) is possible after being frozen in liquid nitrogen at almost -200 degrees Centigrade; b) as more people are currently alive on the planet than in all of earlier human history it suggests, that if a high proportion of folk took up the option, it would completely overwhelm resources; c) reanimated folk (if it proves possible) might well find it difficult to fit in the future; d) the future populations might well  refuse to allow them to benefit from the results of improved medical technologies (this could be a strain on their resources) and e) the cryonics companies (currently looking after 300 folk in the USA and 50 in Russia) may well not persistent long enough to benefit their clients. The current going rate for USA based cryonics customers is $36k, meaning that cryonics is only an option for the comparatively wealthy. Personally, I don't think we should be encouraging people to seriously consider this option.