Gilding the Lily

On a recent visit to a UK Garden Centre, I noticed cactuses for sale. These potted plants were adorned with plastic flowers in an array of bright colours. Genuine cactus flowers only last for a very short time. Surely, however, that is one of the things that makes them so magical? I'm not sure that I could live with the 'fantastic plastics'!

2022 Wishes For a Sad, Little Planet?

It's a bit difficut to identify and rank, the important issues that our planet has to deal with. Most are focused on humans and our behaviours, a) because we are humans and b) our species is currently the major environmental 'influencer'. Should the issues be ranked in terms of urgency or magnitude or both? Are the issues, in any sense, separate, when there is there substantial overlap between them? Would you rank them differently or even have different categories? Here goes. For better or worse. 1. Planetary heating with consequent climate change This is very much down to humans (some much more so than others). There is no doubt, however, that climate change also has a powerful effect on many other organisms and could even render parts of the planet uninhabitable by humans and many other species. There seems to be finally a consensus on this issue but progress in dealing with it is glacially (do they still exist?) slow. 2. Loss of biodiversity The general health of the planet's ecosystems depends on a complex interplay between bacteria, fungi, animals and plants with non-living materials (the atmosphere, water, soil etc). Taking out particular organisms/ changing materials can have widespread repercussions. 'Conservation' is needed but does the planet actually benefit from all the changes produced by human choices? 3. Pollution In terms of its impact on the planet, pollution is a bit like a bird messing its nest. Humans have proved very effective at releasing materials into the environment. Materials include 'greenhouse gases'; petrochemicals; plastics; nitrous oxides; 'forever' chemicals; insecticides; herbicides etc: etc. They can have powerful impacts on climate change; viability of food chains; health of organisms etc. If humans become extinct, there will be a layer of plastics in the rock strata. 4. Pandemics As humans, we obviously focus on human disease, like Covid19. We have not proved to be especially good at dealing with this issue in spite of our advanced technologies. Humans, via their actions (e.g. 'factory farming' and transporting species) also, however, produce/spread pandemics for other organisms e.g. 'bird 'flu' and 'ash dieback'. Humans need to monitor pandemics much more effectively and deal with them in rapid and sensible ways. 5. The World-Wide Web This is a form of rapid communication that should only bring benefits, in terms of information flow. Electronic communication is also used, however, to spread misinformation, hate etc. A major problem has been, of course, the take-over of the www by commercial interests. Most of the highly profitable platforms are linked to product advertising. Advertising revenue is linked to 'readership' so 'click-bait' rules, OK? Misinformation can produce many more 'likes' than accurate information. 6. Migration Migration is a perfectly normal way for many animal species to deal with changing environments (seasonal or longer term). Humans are really no different. Humans migrations are generally triggered by wars and/or environmental problems. Our species has had a long tradition of changing locations, when this has seemed an appropriate response for them and/or their families. In some parts of the world, however, migration is almost treated as a crime. My 2022 wishes for the planet is that we make progress in dealing with or at least improving our responses to each of these 6 issues. Positive and urgent action is needed in all of these areas.

The Natural History of the Omicron Variant?

Although they are not as yet peer-reviewed (the 'gold standard' for scientific publications), six recent studies have compared infections by the Omicron variant of Sars-CoV-2, with those by earlier viral versions (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/02/new-studies-reinforce-belief-that-omicron-is-less-likely-to-damage-lungs). The six studies all confirm that omicron is more likely to multiply in the upper respiratory tract. This is likely to account for the variant's greater transmission. Dense clouds of viral particles will easily emerge from the nose and throat, as infected people breathe, talk and sing. The studies also confirm that omicron is less likely to substantially multiply in the host's lungs. This may well result in this viral variant being less likely to cause serious disease and mortality. This is not, however, the virus adapting to its host, as is the case with some parasitic infections. People who are, however, infected by the omicron variant will produce antibodies that would counter earlier versions of the virus. If this is the case, Sars-CoV-2 looks as if it is on its way to resembling a seasonal 'flu. This is lucky, as this change was never pre-ordained.

A Medical Mystery in New Brunswick?

A whistle-blower, in the Canadian province of New Brunswick, has warned of a progressive neurological illness that has now baffled experts for more than 2 years (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/02/neurological-illness-affecting-young-adults-canada). An official cluster of 48 individuals was identified in the spring of 2021. Multiple sources now say, however, there may be as many as 150 people involved. The present Covid19 pandemic has predictably resulted in a backlog of evaluations. The neurological illness causes swift cognitive decline in some of the afflicted (Alzheimer-like symptoms). Worryingly, it seems to be affecting a growing number of young people. There are also at least 9 cases where 2 people, in close contact but not genetically related (e.g. partners or patient and carer), have both developed symptoms. This suggests that an environmental factor is involved. It's early days, but suspicion has fallen on neurotoxins, including beta-Methylamine-L-alanine (BMAA). BMAA is found in high concentrations in lobster flesh. Lobster fishing is an industry that drives the economies of many of New Brunswick's coastal communities. Rather obviously, there is a lot of concern about the cluster and its likely genesis. Some people think that the current official information flow, is creating fertile conditions for conspiracy 'theories' (pedant's corner would call them 'hypotheses').

A Prosecco Analogy For the Failure of the Democrat's 'Build Back Better' Bill

Mark Blyth (Brown University) details how a local growth model led to the success of prosecco (Treviso's popular sparkling wine). He suggests that the 'torpedoing' of his party's key 'Build Back Better' bill by Democrat, Joe Manchin, occurred for similar reasons (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/dec/31/politics-prosecco-democrats-joe-manchin-key-bill). Prosecco is now presented as a product with an ancient tradition. It was developed, however, in the fascist era of 1924, in an attempt to improve local wines and increase their appeal to the middle classes. The village of Prosecco (after which the sparkling wine is named) was actually 150 km from the production area. Politicians expanded the denominazione d'origine controllata (DOC) to include the village, giving the product a claim to geographical exclusivity (like champagne). This was followed by a successful UNESCO World Heritage claim for the region. Prosecco is now the world's second most popular sparkling wine, with sales of 500m euros in 2019. Given the reliable jobs and wealth creation for the area, as Blyth maintains, 'few in Treviso are keen to dismantle the prosecco growth model'. Similar issues apply to West Virginia, represented by Joe Manchin. Thirty percent of West Virginia's gross domestic product comes from fossil fuels. The area also has the lowest labour force participation rate in the US and huge healthcare issues (related to chronic illness and opioid abuse). Fossil fuels (especially coal) are seen as part of their current local growth model. West Virginia is coal mining. Those who profit, will fight to defend the model, supported by powerful coalitions (no pun intended). Promises about retraining for alternative employments or improving health, will carry little weight. As Blyth says 'why should West Virginia and the other carbon states of the US, be any different' (from the prosecco example)? If true, this doesn't augur very well for getting needed changes in fossil fuel extraction and use anywhere!

The Big Plastic Recyclers Are Actually Big Plastic Dumpers

Countries, like Germany and the UK, receive accolades for being respectively in 1st and 2nd place in the rankings for plastics recycling. Things are not, however, as they seem. For example, more than 140 containers filled with German household plastics waste, are currently rotting and rodent infested in parts of Turkey, Greece and Vietnam. The waste was exported to these countries in what has been termed 'waste colonialism' (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/31/waste-colonialism-countries-grapple-with-wests-unwanted-plastic). Turkey, Greece and Vietnam were chosen, because they have fewer environmental protections than in the 'West'. Germany and the UK are reluctant to burn their own plastics waste, as this would add to their 'carbon footprint'. Dumping it, unwanted, in other countries should not be the answer. If Germany and the UK want to merit their plastics disposal rankings, they need to develop proper mechanisms for effectively dealing with the waste in their own countries.

E-Wars

A newspaper survey was sent to more than 100 scientists; doctors and researchers. These individuals had all provided information on the Covid19 pandemic to the UK government's Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies or one of its linked panels. Nearly 50% responded (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/31/uk-governments-covid-advisers-enduring-tidal-waves-of-abuse). The responses revealed an 'appalling scale of abuse, intimidation and threatening behaviour' directed by people apparently unhappy with the government's responses to the pandemic. Some of the respondants had had:- coordinated online attacks directed towards them; death threats; images of their homes shared online; suspicious packages sent to their addresses; complaints about their behaviour directed to their employers/ the General Medical Council (the body that regulates doctors in the UK); offensive notes left on their cars and abuse, shouted through their home's letterbox. In some cases, an advisor's students, colleagues and family members (including their children) were also subjected to abuse. In one sad case, an advisor's child was repeatedly targeted by a teacher, who blamed the parent for Covid-related lockdowns. The family couldn't make a formal complaint about the teacher as, due to examination restrictions, that teacher determined their child's grade. These attacks on advisors and people around them are wholly unacceptable. Would people rather the politicians took their decisions in a state of ignorance? Scientists; doctors and researchers don't sign up for abuse. One senior scientist, Devi Sridhar (Chair of Public Health at Edinburgh University) provides a graphic account of his own experiences over the last 2 years. It is clear that it's almost impossible to fight misinformation online. An influencer, with thousands of followers, has more traction than any scientist who 'only' has his/her qualifications and track record. Lies flow through the metaverse in speedy chain reactions. It was claimed e.g. that Sridhar a) had published no papers and b) was a philosopher, rather than a 'real' scientist. The second claim was simply based on Sridhar's D.Phil. from Oxford University. The Twitterverse must also be very suspicious of any scientist with a Ph.D. Sridhar says that being a public health expert during the Covid19 pandemic has been "a disheartening experience". He didn't expect such a wave of misinformation, in a developed country, with an established and effective health service. He says "when the next pandemic comes, we must do better". Note that it's 'when' not 'if' the next pandemic comes!