#is scientific reports a good journal

[gothhabiba]

Some hints about evaluating scientific studies

Firstly, understand that something being published in a scientific journal (or an academic journal for the social sciences) does not automatically make it true. Publishers profit from publishing novel, eye-catching, surprising research, which means they are more likely to publish positive results than ones that didn't find a connection between given variables. This means that scientists' careers benefit when they get positive results. Certain institutions also benefit from certain findings above others (a committee for research on "obesity" that is funded by a government organisation tasked with ending it, for example, is likely to try to stretch the evidence to find a link between body weight and poor health outcomes). So how do people evaluate scientific studies, especially without being scientists themselves?

Literature reviews

Literature reviews, which aim to assemble and summarise most of the available or influential papers on a given issue, can be a good place to start when trying to research that issue. Typically, scientific studies shouldn't only be evaluated on a case-by-case basis (since even well-designed studies can be contradicted by other, equally well-designed studies), but a full survey of the different results people have gotten should be taken.

Background information and conflicts of interest

Try to find out who funded a given study. Who published the study? What do these people stand to gain from the results of the study being accepted? (For example: you might pay special attention to the experimental design on a study on whether a certain essential oil helps to reverse hair loss that was carried out by a company that sells that oil.)

In theory, many journals call for study authors to declare any conflicts of interest they may have in a special section of the paper. This section should also list funding sources. You might also look up the authors on linkedin or something to find where they're employed; also look into whether another conglomerate owns that company, &c.

Experimental design

If the study involves a survey, have the authors of the paper provided the questions that people were asked, so that you can evaluate them for potential ambiguity or confusing wording? Not being transparent about the exact wording of questions is a sign that a study isn't trustworthy.

What's the sample size? Is it large enough for the claim the study is making to be reasonable? (More on this in the next section.)

Does the experimental design make sense with what the researchers wanted to study? Are the claims that they make in the conclusion section something that could reasonably be proven or suggested by the experiment that they performed?

Does the experimental design "bake in" an assumption of the truth of its hypothesis? (For example, measuring skeletons to argue that they fall into statistically significant size groupings by sex, using skeletons that you sorted into "male" and "female" groups based on their size, is clearly circular).

How was data collected? People might change their answers to a survey, for example, if they have to speak to a person to give them, rather than writing them down anonymously. Self-reported information (such as a survey aiming to figure out average height or average penis size) is also subject to bias. A good study should be transparent about how the authors collected their data, and be clear about how this could have affected their results.

Also regarding surveys: do the categories that the authors have divided respondents into make sense? Are these categories really mutually exclusive? If respondents were asked to sort themselves into categories (e.g., to select their own race or ethnicity), is there any guarantee that they all interpreted the question / the boundaries of these categories the same way? How would this affect the results?

Interpretation of results

Could anything other than the conclusion that the authors came to explain the results of their experiment? For example, a study finding a correlation between two variables and assuming that this means one variable causes the other ("being in a lot of stress causes short stature" or vise versa) could be missing a secret third thing which is in fact causing both of those things (e.g., poverty). Check to make sure that the authors considered other explanations for their findings and ruled them out (for example, by controlling for other variables such as socioeconomic status).

Are the results of the study generalisable to the population that the authors claim they're generalisable to? For example, the results may not be true for the entire population if only cisgender men between the ages of 30 and 40 were tested. Sampling biases can also affect generalisability—if I surveyed my college to try to find out the percentage of women in the total population, you might ask "but is your college sure to have the same percentage of women as the Earth does?"

Statistics

Are the results statistically significant, or are they within expected margins of error?

Many studies provide a p-value (a number between 0 and 1) for their results. In theory, a p-value represents the chance that the study's results could have been achieved by random chance. If you flip a coin ten times (so, your sample size is 10), it's not very odd to get heads six times and tails four times, and you wouldn't accept that as proof that the coin lands on heads more often than tails. The p-value for that result would be high (that is, there's a high chance that the coin appears unfair only because of random chance). On the other hand, if you flip a coin 100,000 times and it lands on heads 60,000 of those times, that's much better evidence that the coin is not a fair one. The p-value would be much lower. Typically, a p-value lower than 0.05 is considered statistically significant.

In practice, there's more than one way to calculate p-values, and so studies sometimes claim p-values that seem absurdly low. A low p-value is not proof of a claim in and of itself. Check to make sure that the authors of the paper also provide the raw data, and not just the p-values; this indicates a concern with other people being able to independently evaluate their results, rather than just trying to get The Best Numbers.

Citations

If the study cites something that seems foundational to their claims or interpretation, try tracing it back to the paper that was cited. Does the source actually claim what the authors of the first study said it did? Does the source provide proof or support for the claim, or does it seem flimsy, like a "common-sense" assumption?

Replication

Check the studies that cite the one you're currently looking at. Has anyone else tried to replicate the study? What were their results?

What if I really, really don't want to read scientific studies?

That's fine. Not everyone is concerned enough with specific scientific questions for regularly reading scientific papers to be reasonable for them. Just keep in mind that not everything in a scientific journal is necessarily true; that profit motives and personal and institutional bias impact results (e.g. when some studies revealed a lack of poor health outcomes for "obesity," and many scientists responded by calling it a "paradox" that needed to be "solved"); and that pop science and journalistic reporting on science are subject to distortions from the same sources.

Try finding commentators on scientific matters whose output you like, and evaluate their writing the same way you would evaluate any other critical writing.

[literaryvein-reblogs]

Tips for Critical Reading

You'll find many ways to read and understand a text, but keeping a journal as you read is one of the best ways of exploring a piece of writing. By integrating reading and writing, you can interact with the work more fully.

Begin each new novel, play or poem without predetermined bias. If you decide in advance that all good art uses realistic settings and promotes your personal moral values, you close out the possibility of new experiences. You do not have to, nor should you, enjoy every work of literature that you read, but you should be willing to recognize that the imagination is limitless.

Read slowly. This suggestion can't be stressed enough. If you roller-skate through an art museum you won't see the paintings.

Read with pen in hand. Underline key phrases, speeches by major figures, or important statements by the narrator. But don't limit yourself. Underline or highlight anything that seems important or striking. Take notes on ideas or questions (don't trust your memory). Write in the margins. Keep a list of the characters and/or major events on the inside of the front cover. Circle words used in special ways or repeated in significant patterns. Look up words that you don't know or words you think you know but seem to have a special weight or usage.

Look for those qualities that professional writers look for in real life: conflict, contrast, contradiction, and characterization.

Look for rhythm, repetition, and pattern. Successful works of literature incorporate such structural devices in the language, dialogue, plot, characterization, and elsewhere. Pattern is form, and form is the shaping the artist gives to his or her experience. If you can identify the pattern and relate it to the content, you'll be on your way to insight.

Ask silent questions of the material as you read. Don't read passively, waiting to be told the "meaning." Most authors will seldom pronounce a moral. Even if they do, a work of literature is always more than its theme. Use the questions devised by reporters: Who, What, When, Where. Why and How may take more study—such questions probe the inner levels of a text.

Keep a reading journal. Record your first impressions, explore relationships, ask questions, write down quotations, and copy whole passages that are difficult or aesthetically pleasing.

The Reading Journal

Christopher Thaiss in Write to the Limit (Chicago: Holt, 1991) notes that the word journal comes from the French word for day, which is jour.

The word indicates that a journal is kept daily.

Thaiss also suggests that journals are kept for many different reasons: to record events, to keep an ongoing public record, to record feelings, to make close observations for scientific purposes and, finally, to explore emotions, memories and images in order to think and learn about any subject.

Don't feel overwhelmed. Just relax; notice and feel things.

Associate ideas with other subjects, objects or feelings.

Try the following 3 steps:

First, write what you see in the text at the surface level.

Next, write what you feel about what you see.

Finally, write down what you think it means or why you think it is important.

Source ⚜ More: Writing Notes & References

[ilynpilled]

“I think all literature has ideas. […] Ideas about the human condition, and love, and God, and sex, and all of these things are ideas, but the truth is fiction is not a good vehicle for presenting abstract ideas. I mean, non-fiction, journalism, my profession, in which I had my professional degrees, is actually a better way to explicate if you have an idea about some political or scientific method. That’s why scientific journals are full of research reports, they're not full of science fiction stories. What fiction is good about is presenting emotion. Fiction is good about replicating the human experience, and the human heart in conflict is central to all of that. If the story you're telling me doesn't have characters in it that I care about in a situation that's going to engage my emotions, I'm not gonna find it very interesting.”

- GRRM, via

[msbarrybeeson]

Before You Go | Future Donnie & April Insight (Part VI)

(Reader Included)

A/N: Any constructive criticism is appreciated. Reader comments and feedback are also welcomed a lot. 

I have been gone for a long time. Just occupied with my studies! No fan fiction author curse or anything (yet).

Summary: You’re both adopting-parents of Casey. The story follows the perspective of Donatello and April O’Neil during the Kraang apocalypse. You and Leonardo decided to ask them to watch over thirteen-year-old Casey.

In other words, familial interactions between April, Donnie, and Casey Jr.

Reader: Gender-neutral pronouns are used, except the terms “(Mom / Dad)” are also used. Second POV.

Pairing: Rise! Future! Leonardo X Reader

Warnings: Bittersweet.

Word Count:  ~3490

Parts: One / Two / Three / Four / Five / Six / ...

~

Donnie knew how much of a genius he was.

It was no surprise after all. In his late teens, he improved NASA’s satellites to communicate with planets light centuries away. He cured breast cancer through the use of protons in radiation therapy to target specific cells, rather than affecting the harmless. Hell, he even managed to discover a new type of radioactive particles: mutons. By that point, he—.

“—should have been given a Nobel Prize in Medicine and in Chemistry.” Donnie cursed under his breath. He strolled over to his lab bench, equipping his goggles.

Squeeeak. 

April– who was found seated on Donnie’s roughed-up, spinning gaming chair– raised an eyebrow. Her hair had grown out and was left unbounded. Faint wrinkles and eye bags on her features displayed maturity, in contrast to a couple of years ago. However, everyone was well aware that time was not the only factor. 

“Whatcha going on about now, Donnie?”

The softshell huffed. “Recall when I wrote a report about my experimental findings with an invention meant to revive a deceased human being?”

“...You mean the one where you thought it was a good idea to open up Curie’s tomb? Even gone as far as to ask for my help?” April grimaced. “Who’d ever forget that.”

She proceeded to massage her temples. 

“God. You were in all kinds of messed up for that, Don.”

Lightning-like yellow sparks flickered as Donnie had his robotic hands occupied with a butane torch. His goggles were sealed tight around his eyes as he built a oval-looking device on his lab bench. Titanium outer-layer over a seriously complex circuit-board; appearing as if Samsung marketed grenades.

He scoffed. “Oh please. It wasn’t as if I’d taken long to understand how Marie Curie deserves her rest for her great contributions to radiation. Thus is why–.”

“–You decided to take a poor random husband of an old wife,” April interjected.

“Ahem.” Donnie pronounced. “The poor woman was begging me for her husband to be alive again. I was simply gracious and generous enough to not charge her for the process.” He set aside the butane torch. “At least it progressed well; he stayed alive for an additional two years. It gave his wife psychological comfort, and I was able to submit my paper to the N.S.F..” 

He picked up a screwdriver. “Except....” 

April could tell her friend’s eye was twitching. 

“They rejected my findings, nearly had me detained, and claimed it was far too ‘unethical.’” Donnie raised his volume. “Scoff! As if those researchers weren’t committing the crime themselves! Taking bodies away from families and claiming them as scientific property without permission.

If I could go back in time and shove my documents in their jaws, you bet I would.”

April smirked. “Well, I have my regrets too, Donnie.”

“You sound rather amused, April. Is that so surprising? And here I never thought you would regret your part-time job at Albearto’s. Or the fact you wasted money to switch to journalism in university.”

WHACK!

April threw her bat at Donnie’s head, flying back to her hand like a boomerang.

“Watch your mouth, mister. I may have regretted Albearto’s, but not a single moment in my life did I ever regret my journalism passion.” She stood up.

“Ouch.” The softshell vocalized, squinting his eyes toward her. His robotic clampers paused, setting aside the torch and taking off his goggles. 

“Mind yourself, April. Horse-playing is forbidden in the laboratory. I am not consenting to having yet another silver-titanium apparatus get scratched because of you.” Donnie gritted his teeth. “Can you hear the negative connotation?”

“Seriously, Donnie? Where’d that come from? Not only was that years ago but it ain’t anything except a simple accident.” 

“��Simple accident?’” the softshell repeated with dramatic offense. “An accident, like many others in science labs, which could have caused severe damage! Remember the incident when your teacher dumped bleach and vinegar into the trash bin?

You know, if you had paid any attention in your chemistry class, those two would make mustard gas?” Donnie side-eyed his friend. “Simple accidents can have serious consequences, O’Neil.”

A hand crept up the lab bench.

“Uh-huh, and I’m supposed to believe an instance of me knocking over your phone and books would kill somebody?” April crossed her arms. “If anything, the blame’s yours for not organizing your desk when you got drunk on coffee.”

The hand took ahold of the butane torch.

“Donatello? Disorganized? Sounds cheap coming from you, a student majoring in Journalism.”

April pulled up her coat’s sleeves. “Oh boy, you’re about to get it—.”

Squeeeak!

Heads spun and found a 13-year old boy, replacing April’s spot on Donnie’s chair. Casey eyed the torch with a great yet concerning amount of curiosity.

“Yo, what’s this for, Uncle Don?”

At lightning speed, while April ran to move the gaming chair away further from the workbench, Donnie snatched the tool from his hands. “Child. Casey. Young man.” The softshell heaved loudly. “I must inform you this is NOT meant to be handled with such casual ease. How in Hawking did you even—.”

“Don’t your lab have a passcode or something?” 

“–Is what I am wondering myself, O’Neil. I refuse to believe this child remembers the beginning thirty numbers of π–.”

“Nope, only us.” April and Donnie lifted their gazes to his lab entrance. You leaned on the frame while a dear red-eared slider stood just behind. A couple of steps inside, and the metallic lab door shut close. 

Donnie– strangely– was quick to hide his device-in-progress off to the side.

“You’re back!” April grinned. “Hell, you would not believe the convo Donnie and I were having a minute ago.” She hurried to hug you.

“Figures,” Leo remarked. “We could practically hear you yards off.”

“Sounds like things never get old.” You smiled.

There was a side-eye between Donnie and April, before the Commander proceeded to inquire, coughing: “Anyhow.. care to explain the occasion? You two don’t seem to be in a hurry.”

“The only times you ever visit my laboratory are to prepare for immediate combat engagement, and you look awfully collected.” The softshell furrowed his brows.

“No, no.” You waved your hands, shaking your head. “Thank God no. We came here to ask if you two could take care of our Casey here while we head out.” The other turtle scrunched his in-quote eyebrows. “You— You came here to request us to... babysit him?”

April jabbed him in his plastron.

“You see? Just like I said.” Leo turned to you. “I know my brother, love. Don’s not the kind of guy to take responsibility for a kid. Or anyone, really.”

“Hold on.” Donnie narrowed his eyes. “I never said I refused, Leo.”

“Don’t know, it sounds like it to me.”

“Well, my misinformed brother, contrary to your belief, I am perfectly capable of handling a child.”

You huffed with amusement. Your husband only winked back.

“If you say so, Don.”

“Where are you two heading off for if you needed us to watch over him?” April inquired. “Wondering, ‘cause this never happened even when you two leave for patrol.”

“Just finding some time for ourselves.”

April exclaimed, “As in a honeymoon? Why not just say so? We’ll leave you two alone–.”

“–In this economy and climate?” Donnie interjected. “Has it also not been six years since your yet-to-be-legal marriage?”

“Alright, alright,” Leonardo chuckled. “Cut us some slack, bro. Finding time wasn’t easy when there’s Kraang above our necks.”

“Right, and you’re going on a honeymoon, how?” The softshell crossed his arms. “Simply because you’re the leader does not equate to you making wise decisions, Leo.”

“His ōdachi can teleport anyone to anyplace, we have some hope we can easily teleport to a remote area,” you answered. “One without Kraang infestation. It’ll be hard, but we may as well try.”

“Bonus points if we find clear skies and an ocean.” The red-eared turtle grinned, wrapping his arm over your shoulders.

“What’s a honeymoon, (Mom / Dad)?”

Your hand went to caress Casey’s cheek. “Parent quality time. It just means you get to handle yourself like the responsible grown-up you’ll become one day. Just promise me you’ll be on your best behavior around Uncle Don and Auntie April?”

“I promise, (Mom / Dad)!”

“Good boy,” Leo laughed, ruffling the kid’s hair.

“You didn’t ask Mikey and Raph to help out too, or?”

“Between you and me, I think you guys are better of making sure Casey doesn’t get into any chaos,” you whispered to April. “Don’t tell them that, though.”

She laughed. “Okay, I see how it is. You both have fun.” 

Donnie bit his lip. Right as Leonardo and (Name) turn to exit the laboratory, he extended his arm out to them.

“Leo, (Name).”

You two faced back to him once more.

“Don’t kill yourselves out there.”

Everyone’s eyes widened– April, you, and Leonardo himself. But the brother in blue snickered, holding a smile that reached his eyes. “So you do also care for me, Don. And all this time I thought you were plotting to put me in my grave or something.”

“We won’t.” Leo placed a hand on your shoulder. “You got my word.”

“Bye (Mom / Dad)! Bye Papa!”

“We’ll be back soon, Casey!”

Donnie stood in silence as you finally left, leaving himself with none other than his best friend and his nephew. “I refuse to believe this is the future we have to deal with.”

“Times changed all of us, didn’t they?” April spoke. “One day we wish each other a good one, and the next, we hope we just don’t die. I could’ve been a famous news anchor by now, make my mother happy, fight crime without worrying about dying the next second.

..I wonder if there’s anyone else out there besides the small number of us down here.”

“..I doubt it.”

Donnie pulled himself together and walked back to his workbench, operating his clampers to work once again. He put on his goggles. Casey, being a young teenager of enthusiasm, peeked over.

“Watch yourself, boy,” April warned.

“Don’t worry about me, Auntie. I’m only standing over here.” Casey narrowed his eyes upon the glowing and metal-like ball his uncle had his tools on. “What are you working on, Uncle Don?”

“A sphere.”

“A sphere?”

“You heard correctly.”

“That sounds kind of boring.”

Donnie had to hold himself back from remarking with: ‘That is exactly what every child whose intellect is doomed would say.’

“I’m sure your mother would find it rather moving.”

“(Mom / Dad)? I don’t understand what’s emotional about a ball, though.”

“Hey Casey.” April coughed. “Why not tell us about your mask here? Haven’t taken a good look at it before. Maybe Uncle Don would like to hear it too.”

“You actually want me to talk about my mask?”

“Ain’t a problem, is it?”

“No.” He fidgeted with his fingers a bit. “You don’t have anything else to do?”

“We were just told to watch over you, kid.”

“Yeah, but everyone I know is always busy with the Kraang or supplying weapons. I never really get chances to hang out.”

There was a brief pause in the butane torch’s flame.

April’s expression softened. Her hand came up to brush his black hair. “Things have gotten calmer up there. So you’ve got plenty of time with us now.”

Casey smiled.

“So your mask?” 

The boy alternated between covering his face and removing it. “(Mom / Dad) gave it to me. She told me it is based on the one worn by my biological mother. (Mom / Dad) also said that my birth mother was kind of crazy-funny and likes to be loud. She would have a stick to play– what was it– hockey?

I don’t know what kind of game hockey is supposed to be, but I guess it’s nice to know how life was like before all the Kraang.”

A sad smile crept on April’s lips. 

“Anyways, I thought the mask looked kind of plain, so I decided to draw red marks on it. See?” Casey showed his mask off, fingers tapping the surface. “Guess who it looks like!”

There were two bold and thick streaks of red. Each one ran through one eye, truly a defining characteristic. The Commander chuckled, already imagining how much pride her friend in blue would feel from the fact a kid– let alone one he had been parenting– looked up to him so much.

“You know, I am seeing someone familiar here.” April hummed as she put on a thoughtful facade. Fingers holding her chin and everything. “Got to be Uncle Don.”

Named turtle paused for a moment and raised a brow.

“Seriously, Auntie April?” On the other hand, Casey gave her an incredulous look and shook his head. “You probably want to get your eyes checked out, ‘cause Uncle Don doesn’t have any red stripes.” Off to the side. “And even if he did, he won’t look as cool as Dad.”

April snickered behind her palm as Donnie eyed the boy from behind his goggles.

“You’re right, you’re right. Just messing with you, kid.” Her hand ruffled his hair once more. “Sounds like you really admire your Papa, don’t you?”

“Why wouldn’t I? Dad has an awesome sword that opens up portals. He always moves so quickly whenever he’s fighting. Bam! And the Kraang’s gone!” The teenager stretched his arm for emphasis. “Even as the leader, Papa knows when to get serious and when to make people laugh. He also cares a lot about me, (Mom / Dad), you guys, and everyone!”

It made even Donnie himself smile. 

However, the way Casey’s enthusiasm died down had not gone unnoticed. “I’ve always wanted to help out though.” He sighed, shoulders slumping. “I want to fight the Kraang right by his and (Mom / Dad)’s side. Except I barely get the chance to, because they keep telling me to stay close to base and hide behind a giant rock.”

April crossed her arms and went quiet. His feelings were nothing new. In fact, she experienced the same thing herself, seeing she had always been a human. It was like that until–.

“Have no hard feelings,” Donnie spoke up, his hands and eyes remained on his spheric gadget. The sparks were flying. “Your parents are merely worried about your well-being.”

“I know, I know. They won’t have to though, if I can have enough training or something.” Casey sighed. “Then again, I also know I’m only a normal sensitive human.

...Why can’t I be a mutant instead?”

“Ahem. You are classified as a human. That is a true statement and one you cannot change.” Donnie hummed. “However, that does not mean you cannot be strong and capable in other ways.”

“Why does it sound like you’ve been in my place before?”

“Perhaps I did. Did you truly think being a soft-shell turtle is easy? I happened to be born as one of the only Testudines species whose outer shell cannot protect.” Donnie remarked. “Casey, your mask.” His hand signaled.

“What about my mask?”

“I merely want to add something.”

Confused, he hopped off the chair and handed the mask over. “Hmm. As long as you don’t mess with the stripes, Uncle Don.”

“Who says I won’t?”

Casey kicked Donnie’s leg.

“‘Ow,’ I say sarcastically without feeling physical pain.”

“Hmph.” He crossed his arms. “Why do you keep saying things like that?”

“Such as?”

“You say those action verbs, even when you’re already doing them.”

April snorted. “Just his thing, kid. Uncle Don’s got his special quirks.”

“Do you have a quirk?”

“Picking unnecessary fights for one,” Donnie commented.

“You only call them ‘unnecessary,’ because you never want to fix the problem.”

He rolled his eyes. “My solution would’ve been ten times more efficient if you had allowed my technology and I to do the work.”

Casey wondered. “Does your tech ever go haywire, Uncle Don?”

“No.”

“Oh man,” April began, “you should’ve been there for this one time. Your Uncle Don was building some kind of overprotective bed to keep your late Gramps from waking up from his beauty sleep.”

“Gramps likes to sleep?”

“You’d be surprised to hear that he sure does.”

“Then what happened?”

“Uncle Don asked your Dad, Uncle Mikey, and Uncle Raph to try punching, slicing, throwing whatever they could on the bed. They were attacking it like crazy!”

“And then?” 

“And the bed was even more insane, ‘cause there were actual missiles shooting out! They went straight for his brothers. At some point, it got overboard, so Uncle Don tried to command it to stop.”

“I’m hearing a ‘but’ coming.”

“But it malfunctioned and thought Uncle Don was the enemy!”

“However!” Donnie pointed his finger up, interrupting the story-telling. “It did not take long for my creation to recognize his master.”

“Still went haywire in my book,” April remarked. 

“Ignoring that.” His robotic hand tapped the edge of his workbench, grabbing Casey’s attention. “Come here, young man.” He slid back the mask, except in his hands, it felt as if the frame had thicken.

“It looks the same, but it doesn’t feel the same?”

“Try wearing it over your face.”

The boy did as told. All of a sudden, a bunch of green rectangles and words appeared in his vision. He gasped in awe. He spun around slowly, watching the rectangle focus on a figure through the wall.

“Yes yes, I know. I am well aware of how amazing I am.” Donnie huffed in pride. “I have opted to construct an interface with your mask. I cannot see why you shouldn’t have something to defend yourself with,” he reasoned. “I have other updates in mind later on. As of now, however, your mask will help you detect life forms across other rooms or through other objects.” 

“That’s so cool!” The boy hesitated though. “But I don’t want to break it or anything.”

“Hey.” April rested her hand on Casey’s shoulder, giving a firm squeeze. “Our resources are already scarce. Using then losing them is better than nothing. You better make the most of our tech. Understood, soldier?”

Casey grinned underneath his mask. He fixed his posture up and saluted. “Gotcha–! Understood, Commander!” 

He faced the inventor, whose hands were already back to being occupied with the “sphere.” “Thanks so much, Uncle Don!” Casey exclaimed, leaping towards the turtle to give a tight hug. “You’re the best!” 

Upon contact, Donnie stiffened up, but his lack of experience with physical touch did not prevent a smile forming on his face. He extended a robotic arm, patting Casey’s back. 

The boy then scanned around curiously with his mask. “Hey! Think I spot Uncle Mikey and Uncle Raph two floors down! They’re holding hands over a table or something. Why are so many people circling around them?”

April rolled her eyes. “Sounds like another arm-wrestling match between the our youngest and oldest brother.” 

Just like that, Casey booked it out of the laboratory so quickly, it reminded her of a certain red-eared slider. “What the–! Casey!” April groaned. “And here I thought we don’t have to deal with runaway kids. I better catch up to him.” 

“Would not worry about him too much,” Donnie commented. 

“What do you mean by that?”

“Considering we will not always be alive to protect him... the sooner we leave him to himself, the easier it will be for him to survive alone.” 

“Hey. Come on now.” April walked to her best friend’s side. “Don’t you say things like that. We’re all going to survive this together–.”

“April.” Slight pain wavered in his voice. “You know as well as I do how our current reality is. It is only a matter of time before the Kraang finds everyone.” 

“Yet you’re still here trying.”

No response.

“It’s all because of the kid, isn’t it?” April affirmed. “He ain’t any genius prodigy you were expecting long ago. But he gave you a reason to try– he became someone worth fighting for.”

“I would not put it as simply as that.”

She shrugged. “That’s how I’d say it. You know you’re not the only one whose life changed because of Casey.”

Donnie paused his work, turning off the butane torch and finally pulling his goggles off his eyes again. “...Casey reminds me of when we were young, being rash and immature teenagers like any other. I hate admitting to such thing, but I was one too. And I hate admitting much more how much I missed those times.

The child has known nothing of the trouble we’ve experienced outside, April: when Cassandra was killed, when Draxum was torn apart, when Dad decided to sacrifice himself despite the slim odds.” His hands clenched into fists.

“Do not expect me to have any false hope for our future, but do not assume I would want Casey to feel the same way. For as long as he can, I want him to hold onto that false hope.”

“...” April had her arms crossed. Her eyes slowly came to linger on the workbench. “Is that ‘sphere’ his false hope?”

“..No. Not his.” Donnie traced his thumb over his contraption. “It’s for (Name).”

[covid-safer-hotties]

Also preserved on our archive (Check in for daily updates!)

By Blake Murdoch

Since the COVID pandemic began, claims that the disease poses only minimal risk to children have spread widely, on the presumption that the lower rate of severe acute illness in kids tells the whole story. Notions that children are nearly immune to COVID and don’t need to be vaccinated have pervaded.

These ideas are wrong. People making such claims ignore the accumulating risk of long COVID, the constellation of long-term health effects caused by infection, in children who may get infected once or twice a year. The condition may already have affected nearly six million kids in the U.S. Children need us to wake up to this serious threat. If we do, we can help our kids with a few straightforward and effective measures.

The spread of the mistaken idea that children have nothing to worry about has had some help from scientists. In 2023 the American Medical Association’s pediatrics journal published a study–which has since been retracted—reporting the rate of long COVID symptoms in kids was “strikingly low” at only 0.4 percent. The results were widely publicized as feel-good news, and helped rationalize the status quo, where kids are repeatedly exposed to SARS-COV-2 in underventilated schools and parents believe they will suffer no serious harm.

In January 2024, however, two scientists published a letter with me explaining why that study was invalid. Some of the errors made it hard to understand how the study survived peer review. For example, the authors claimed to report on long COVID using the 2021 World Health Organization definition, but didn’t properly account for the possibility of new onset and fluctuating or relapsing symptoms, even though that definition and the subsequently released 2023 pediatric one emphasize those attributes. Any child with four symptom-free weeks—even nonconsecutive ones—following confirmed infection was categorized by the study authors as not having long COVID.

In August, the authors of the study retracted it. They did not admit to the errors we raised. But they did admit to new errors, and said these mistakes meant they understated the rate of affected children.

And that rate, according to other research, is quite high. The American Medical Association’s top journal, JAMA, in August published a key new study and editorial about pediatric long COVID. The editorial cites several robust analyses and concludes that, while uncertainty remains, long COVID symptoms appear to occur after about 10 percent to 20 percent of pediatric infections.

If you’re keeping score, that’s as many as 5.8 million affected children in the U.S.—so far. And we know studies and surveys of adults have found that repeat infections heighten the risk of long-term consequences.

The JAMA study comparing infected and uninfected children found that trouble with memory or focusing is the most common long COVID symptom in kids aged six to 11. Back, neck, stomach and head pain were the next most common symptoms. Other behavioral impacts included “fear about specific things” and refusal to go to school.

Adolescents aged 12 to 17 reported different leading symptoms. Change or loss in smell or taste was most common, followed by body pains, daytime tiredness, low energy, tiredness after walking and cognitive deficits. The study noted that symptoms “affected almost every organ system.” In other words, these symptoms reflect real physiological trauma. For example, SARS-COV-2 can cause or mediate cardiovascular, neurological and immunological harm, even increasing the relative risk of new onset pediatric diabetes when compared with other lesser infections.

Children in schools today are often described as struggling with emotional regulation, attention deficits and developmental problems. Adolescents have some of the worst standardized test scores in decades. Pandemic measures such as school closures—most of which were short-lived and occurred several years ago—have been blamed almost entirely for children’s present-day behavioral and learning problems.

While it is clear these early pandemic disruptions negatively impacted many children, the unproven notion that “the cure was worse than the disease” has become dogma and sometimes involves reimagining history. For example, the Canadian Pediatric Society’s most recent COVID vaccination guidance fails to even acknowledge the existence of pediatric long COVID, while stating without evidence in its preamble that children were more affected by pandemic disruptions in activities than direct viral effects. It’s hard to imagine how this wording could encourage pediatricians and parents to vaccinate children against a disabling virus.

Consider also a small but widely publicized Bezos Family Foundation–funded study which unscientifically claimed accelerated cortical thinning, a type of brain restructuring that occurs over time, is caused by “lockdowns.” The study design could not demonstrate cause and effect, however, but only correlation. Pediatric brain experts have critiqued the research, pointing out that “no supporting evidence” was provided for the claim cortical thinning is from social isolation, and that it isn’t necessarily pathological. “Lockdowns” were neither defined nor controlled for in the study, which relied on 54 pandemic-era brains scans from different children than the prepandemic scans they were compared to—meaning there was no measurement of brain changes in specific individuals. The pandemic-era scans came from months when relevant CDC seroprevalence data estimate that the number of children with one or more infections rose from about one in five to around three in five. We might reasonably predict that many of the studied brain scans were therefore from children who recently had COVID.

It is understandably disturbing to entertain the idea that we might currently be recklessly allowing millions of children to be harmed by preventable disease. That may be part of why problematic studies such as these have gotten headlines. It is more disturbing, however, that almost no public attention has been given to infection itself as a potential cause of children’s behavioural and learning problems.

This makes no sense. We know that COVID harms the brain. Neuroinflammation, brain shrinkage, disruption of the blood-brain barrier and more have been documented in adults, as have cognitive deficits. These deficits have been measured as equivalent to persistent decreased IQ scores, even for mild and resolved infections. Millions of people have, or have experienced, “brain fog.” What, then, do we guess a child’s COVID-induced “trouble with focusing or memory” might be?

When you put together the estimate that 10 to 20 percent of infected kids may experience long-term symptoms, that many of the most common symptoms affect cognition, energy levels and behavior, and that children are being periodically reinfected, you have a scientific rationale to partly explain children’s widely reported behavioural and learning challenges.

We can do something to protect our kids. We can vaccinate them every season, which somewhat reduces the risk of long COVID. We can keep sick children home by passing laws that create paid sick leave and end attendance-based school funding. We can normalize rather than vilify the use of respirator masks that help prevent the spread of airborne diseases.

Finally, we can implement fantastic new engineered indoor air quality standards designed to greatly reduce the spread of germs. Clean indoor air should be expected as a right, like clean water. The cost of providing cleaner indoor air is low relative to the economic benefits, which even when conservatively modeled are in the tens of billions annually in the U.S. and more than ten times the costs. These costs are also small compared to the price children and their families would pay in suffering as a result of preventable long-term impairment.

By regulating, publicly reporting and periodically inspecting building air quality, similarly to how we oversee food safety in commercial kitchens, we can greatly reduce the spread of disease and reap huge benefits for everyone—especially children.

[cutekittenlady]

If I could inject Skyfire into the animated verse I'd make it so he and Starscream still have their shared history but it's a tad different.

Starscream starting off as some form of scientist, or researcher. A role he finds boring and is frustrated by what he perceives as a lack of respect. And Skyfire having been created/designed as a military machine (much like Omega Supreme in animated) and like Starscream he's dissatisfied with the role and dreams of being allowed to explore the stars and pursue knowledge.

This mutual dissatisfaction was the foundation of their friendship as they both felt forced into a life they didn't want and weren't "destined" for and ultimately resulted in them siding with the decepticons in order to get the lives they wanted.

Unfortunately they also shared a mutual jealousy. Skyfire being jealous that starscream had access to a wide range of knowledge, a privilege he didn't seem to appreciate. And of course Starscream was jealous of Skyfires power and the fear he could inspire in others (something Skyfires self conscious about) as well as what he perceived a skyfire wasting his potential. This would lead to a lot of built up tension between them as Skyfire would start to feel Starscream didn't take full advantage of the opportunities and choices he was given, things Skyfire would have killed to have. And of course Starscream began to perceive Skyfire as looking down on him.

Of course this friendship would eventually fall out somehow which I think would coincide with Skyfire leaving the Decepticons as he came to object to their methods and realizing that Megatron had no intention of actually giving him what he had likely been promised. That being a cybertron that would let him freely explore the universe and pursue his true passion of scientific research and development.

Now, an important aspect I'm not sure of is WHEN Skyfire betrays the decepticons and/or defects. As it would slightly alter the reasoning for why he doesnt seem to be around in series. Not by a lot but still.

Regardless of whether Skyfire openly defects, acts as a spy, leaks autobots into, etc. he winds up playing a role in winning the war and driving the decepticons from Cybertron.

Although he ultimately helped them win, I think tfa Skyfire would not stick with the autobots. Either because he winds up exiled like the rest of the decepticons (something I imaging happening if he didn't defect until the end of the war) or else he allowed himself to go into self-exile after having lost faith in Cybertron as a whole.

After all, he'd banked on the decepticons being a way to change cybertron into a more equal and free society, but they'd just turned out to be warmongering despots. And while the autobots likely do change a bit after the war, its not enough for Skyfire to gain any confidence in the government. Besides all that a requirement for his full amnesty could have been a required frame change, something skyfire rebelled against. Not because he loved having a war frame but because he viewed it as just another way the autobot government was exerting their power over his body and mind.

So Skyfire is either forced into exile or willing goes into it in order to preserve his own ideals. I imagine him finding old reports and journals and slowly teaching himself all the scientific knowledge and know how that he'd always wanted to learn and partaking in scientific experiments and explorations. All of which hes VERY satisfied to find that hes good at.

He tells himself that hes happy this way, but in reality he is crushingly lonely. He creates an assitant bot named Doc (stealing that from idw lol) and may even start keeping some organic lifeforms he finds around his lab as "pets" in order to have some form of company. Beyond the crushing loneliness though, hes also frustrated to find that despite pursuing the self education he'd always wanted hes dissatisfied as he has no one to share these discoveries with.

How exactly he comes into contact with our main cast I'm not sure. Maybe they crash land on the planet or asteroid or moon or whatever his lab is on, maybe the decepticons/autobots are both coming after him, etc.

Regardless of the exact circumstances, I really like to imagine that he develops a sorta odd friendship with Isaac Sumdac, who is someone of similar interests he can finally share his own knowledge and ideas with. Furthermore he'd probably have some VERY interesting interactions with the Jettwins (he isn't a huge fan of what was done to them, even if they seemingly enjoy the results, as it shows yet again how ready the government of cybertron is to control the forms of regular cybertronians to meet their own ends) and especially Omega Supreme who, much like Skyfire, was more or less created to be used in a war.

[powerfultipsforyourhealth]

The 12 easiest ways to lose weight

Many people develop an increase in body weight in middle age, and it occurs gradually, somewhat imperceptible. Of course, some resort to strict diet or exercise, but some attempts fail due to the nature of the busy lifestyle, family and social commitments, and working hours.

Two new studies offer a glimmer of hope in the form of small changes approaches to weight loss and improved health, with firm promise of promising scientifically grounded results.

In her research study, Professor Amanda Daly, a professor of behavioral medicine at Loughborough University, and her research team analyzed data from 19 trials involving more than 3,000 people to see if a simple microapproach yields enough changes to help maintain a healthy weight or lose excess weight. The results showed that participants who adhered to the approach of small changes – such as walking 1,000 extra steps a day or cutting 100-200 calories by choosing healthier alternatives to highly processed, sugary and high-calorie-rich foods lost about 1 kg less compared to those who did not follow these methods over eight to 14 months. While the amount doesn't seem great, Professor Daly says it was enough to stave off weight gain.

Small goals that are easy to achieve

Professor Daly said: "Adult weight gain is not usually the result of a short lack of exercise and excessive intake, but rather rather the result of a gradual decrease in activity levels and increased energy intake, the effects of which are cumulative and affect over time.

Professor Daly adds that providing guidelines that ask people to make big changes to their health, such as cutting calories by 500 or more a day or taking 10,000 steps from the starting point from scratch, requires a lot and may be better to "make them realize that it's only good to make one small change the first time and gain confidence in achieving it," noting that "big changes, by their very nature, make it difficult for some to achieve."

Small changes in food

In the second scientific study, published in the journal Nature Food, researchers from the University of Michigan reported how small changes in food choices can also help get extra minutes of healthy living. By classifying 5,800 foods according to their "dietary burden of disease," the researchers found, for example, that a small dietary shift such as eating 30 grams of nuts and seeds a day provides a 25-minute gain from healthy living — as expected from During an increase in disease-free life expectancy. "The message from researchers now is that doing small things, being physically active, eating a little better, and turning ideas into an initial change approach can make a difference to human health, and it's also a stimulus that can drive thinking about bigger changes in the long term," says Daly.

Simple methods of motor activity

1- Strengthen the gluteal muscles while sitting

A 2019 study from Wichita State University, published in the journal Peer J, showed that pressing the gluteal muscles in the buttocks while sitting in a chair can enhance strength and endurance, and possibly reduce the risk of injury. Study participants were asked to sit up straight in a chair — hips and knees at right angles, knees shoulder-width and feet apart — and squeeze the glutes as hard as possible for five seconds before relaxing and repeating. The exercise does not require any weights Or training tools. After eight weeks of doing this for an accumulated 15 minutes per day, one doesn't even need to do them all at once, lab test results showed that it increased gluteal muscle strength by 16% compared to an 11% increase in the control group that was asked to do the same amount of conventional gluteal bridge exercises.

2- Jump 10 times twice a day

The slightest amount of exercise can make a difference when it comes to maintaining bone strength throughout life, balancing the risk of osteoporosis. For an experiment, published in the American Journal of Health Promotion, 60 premenopausal women aged 25 to 50 were asked to perform 10 or 20 jumps with 30 seconds of rest between jumps, twice a day for 16 weeks, to see how they affected their bones. The results showed that daily jumping led to a 0.5 percent increase in bone density, while the control group that did not jump showed a 1.3 percent reduction in bone density during the four-month trial.

3- Reduce 10% of red and processed meat

In a study conducted by the University of Michigan, calculations by researchers revealed that for every gram of processed meat a person consumes, 0.45 minutes of their lifespan are lost. If a person eats a lot of red or processed meat, the researchers' advice is to replace 10% with a combination of whole grains, fruits, vegetables, nuts and legumes, which can add 48 minutes of healthier life.

4- Climb 4 groups of stairs in less than a minute

Last year, researchers at the European Society of Cardiology conference reported that being able to climb four steps of stairs, equivalent to 60 steps, in less than a minute is a strong predictor of good heart health. Study author Jesús Petero, a cardiologist at the University Hospital of a Spanish Coruña, says: "If it takes you more than a minute and a half to climb four steps on the stairs, your health is suboptimal, and it would be good to consult a doctor."

5- Jumping rope for 10 minutes a day

Daily jumping for ten minutes over 6 weeks has been shown to lead to improvements in cardiovascular health, equivalent to what is benefited by running for 30 minutes a day, in addition to strengthening bones.

6- Spend 60 minutes outdoors

Getting out of the house for an hour a day is, in short, the exact translation for better health, according to the results of a study to be published in the December issue of the journal Affective Disorders.  Sean Cain, an assistant professor of psychology at Monash University in Australia, studied the effects of daylight exposure on the mood and health of more than 400,000 participants at Biobank in the UK. He discovered that adults in the UK, on average, spend about 2.5 hours of daylight outside, and that each hour of daylight exposure is associated with easier morning wakefulness and reduced overall fatigue. Kane says:  "Getting bright light in the day is just as important as avoiding light at night to sleep."

7- 1000 additional steps per day

Instead of targeting 10,000 steps or more, start by recording an additional 1,000 steps per day. Henrietta Graham, a researcher in sports and exercise science at Loughborough University and colleagues, and the lead researcher on the latest scientific study, says. "People who do a low step count per day and who try to accomplish 10,000 steps per day from day one are more likely to give up." Even this added step, just 1,000, will pay off. In May, researchers from the University of North Carolina conducted a study on the walking habits of 16,732 women age 60 or older. Presenting their findings at the American Heart Association's Conference on Epidemiology, Prevention, Lifestyle, Heart Health and Cardiac Metabolism, they showed that, compared to women who did not take daily steps, each initial increase of 1,000 steps per day was associated with a 28 percent lower risk of dying during the eight-year follow-up period, and women who took more than 2,000 steps a day in continuous shifts had a 32 percent lower risk of death. You can walk for two minutes every hour of the workday, about 20 minutes a day, a goal that a team from the University of Utah School of Medicine showed was associated with a 33% lower risk of death.

8- Jog for 5 minutes

Prof Dali says you can start by setting small goals before aspiring to run marathons "over distances of about 10km or more". Small, consistent but moderate exercise patterns can make all the difference. One study, published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, involving 55,137 adults showed that running at a manageable pace for just five minutes a day was associated with an increased lifespan of an adult by about three years.

9- Commit to 20-second training doses

If you really can't find the time (or motivation) to exercise, the practice of taking light infusions is something to think about. Martin Gibala, professor of kinesiology at McMaster University in Canada and principal investigator of a study on light training doses, found that just 20 seconds of strenuous exertion, like climbing 60 steps three times a day, resulted in a 5 percent increase in fitness and an improvement in leg muscle strength after six weeks. Graham says that just as much activity will help: "You can walk or run around, anything that makes you breathe hard will be helpful. Any amount of activity is better than nothing."

10- Practice yoga for 15 minutes daily

If one can't commit to a 90-minute yoga class, start with 15 minutes of simple exercise, and you'll get major benefits. A study, published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, reported how yoga and deep breathing for a quarter of an hour reduced blood pressure by 10 percent as well as a heart rate reduction for at least 24 hours in a group of 78 patients with mild hypertension.

11- Stand on one leg for 20 seconds daily

By the time a person reaches the age of twenties, there are about 70,000 specialized neurons, motor neurons, concentrated in the lower part of the spinal cord, which connects with the leg muscles to control balance. But researchers at Manchester Metropolitan University have shown that by the age of 75, 40 per cent of these motor neurons are lost even in the fittest individuals. The result is a deterioration in coordination of movement and balance. While young people can stand on one leg, with their eyes closed, for 30 seconds, the average age of 70 can only hold up for four to five seconds. But the time period can be improved with practice. The goal should initially be to stand on one leg for 20 seconds daily, then it develops gradually and the exercise is repeated with the eyes closed. "You can stand on one leg while brushing your teeth or waiting for the water to boil [to make tea or coffee," says Graham.

12- Lifting weights for 13 minutes

Not everyone needs or can head to the gym just to train to lift weights in low doses for short periods. Indeed, exercise physiologists at Lehman College in New York have figured out the possibility of not going to gym training and achieving good results, asking participants in a scientific study to perform 8 to 12 repetitions of exercise with weights in three weekly sessions, and lifting them until their muscles are too tired to do anything else. While the researchers asked some to perform five sets of each in a 70-minute gym session, they assigned other participants to do just three sets of 40 minutes and do one set of each exercise, and the gym group spent only about 13 minutes doing weightlifting. Two months later, the researchers revealed that strength gains were similar across all groups and that those who did the fast-paced exercise for 13 minutes in the gym had similar results to those who exercised at home for longer periods of time and training sessions.......read more

🤰🤱🙋‍♂️🧗‍♂️

[emberfrostlovesloki]

Criminal Minds ABCs...

Hi all! I hope you are having a good week so far. I made a Criminal Minds ABCs for fun. All of the ABCs deal with characters or concepts from the show. This took a long time to make and I'm very proud of it, so I hope you enjoy it! See all of the ABCs under the cut and all photo credits are at the end! Please be kind to yourself today and I am sending you a hug. All likes, comments, and reblogs are appreciated - Love Levi <3

A stand for Aaron Hotchner: Unit chief of the BAU.

B is for the BAU a department of the FBI the researches cases on serial killers.

C is for Criminology: The scientific study of crimes and criminals.

D is for Derek Morgan: Former Chigaco cop and friend to Penelope Garcia and Spencer Reid.

E is for Evidence: The available body of facts indicating whether a belief is true or valid.

F is for Fingerprint: An impression made on a surface by a person's fingertip.

G if for Penelope Garcia: Spunky Technical Analyst of the BAU.

H is for Homicide: The killing of one person by another.

I is for Interrogation: The action of interrogation or the process of being interrogated.

J is for Jennifer Jareau: The Media Liason for the BAU.

K is for Kill shot: To shoot a gun with the purpose of killing someone.

L is for LDSK: The FBI's acronym for Long Distance Serial Killer.

M stands for Murder: The unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

N stands for New Agent Training: The Basic Field Training Course is designed to train new special agents and intelligence analysts together to prepare them for the field.

O stands for Organized: Arranged in a systematic way.

P Stands for Prior Record: An individual's previous criminal record.

Q stands for Question: A sentence worded or expressed so as to elicit information.

R stands for Revenge: The act of inflicting hurt or harm on someone for an unjury or wrong suffered at their hands.

S stands for Spencer Reid: Eidetic genius and youngest member of the BAU.

T stands for Trophy: A souvenir or memento of a crime.

U stands for Unsub: The FBI's slang for Unknown Subject.

V stands for Victimology: The study of the victims of crime and the psychological effects on them of their experience.

W stands for Witness: A person who sees an event, typically a crime or accident, take place.

X stands for eXamination: A detailed inspection or investiation.

Y stands for Yellow Journalism: A style of newspaper reporting that emphasizes sensationalism over facts.

Z stands for ZZZ's on the jet home

Text Break Banner by @cafekitsune

Tag list: @geminitapestry @silk-spun @alicewonderao3 @ssahotchnerr @cumulo-stratus @criminalskies

Want to be added to my tag list? Please check out this post (linked) 

Want to send in a request? Please check out this post, CM Request Post (linked)

Photo Credits:

A @hotchs-big-hands B @bau-bitch02 C @elysianmuses D @pennyspearl E @sewertrashmax F @dienette-666 G @pinkiebieberpie H @baekkku I @magicbecameouragenda J @tokyocyborg K @animefan-2013 L @its-where-the-wild-things-are M @roting N @moodboardmix O @study-sphere P @finalchokehold Q @aurorasoleil R @bebs-art-gallery S @tokyocyborg T @wheresmyfuckintea U @lieutenant-bixbyV @thesorceresstemple W @shegetsburned X @cloverdaisies Y @dumblr Z @notoneofyouhere

[stargazer-sims]

Professor Belle

Belle: Félix, can I go with you to the excavation site tomorrow?

Félix: Of course, but I'll need you to stay with me the whole time. I have a new group of students, and they'll need to focus. I don't want them thinking they have to babysit you.

Belle: No one has to babysit me. I'm a member of the research team. Right?

Félix: Yes, but the students might be skeptical of that. Not every person your age is as responsible and intelligent as you, and unfortunately, some people have a tendency to prejudge.

Belle: Well, that’s just dumb.

Davian: *laughing* It's good to know the youngest member of the research team can still act like a ten year old.

Belle: I'm responsible and intelligent, but nobody said I was a grownup.

Davian: Fair point.

Félix: But you are mature, and we can trust you. That's why you're allowed to come to the excavation site.

Belle: Yeah. Can you imagine my friends at the site? Junior would probably break stuff, and you'd always have to be getting Caroline down from a tree or something. I know I should only climb trees around the field station.

Davian: We'd be happier if you didn't climb trees anywhere, but you know the risks, so...

Belle: Evaluate my choices, right?

Davian: Right.

Belle: I'll be too busy to climb trees tomorrow anyway. I have discoveries to make and students to teach.

Félix: Oh? Are you taking over for me, Professor Belle?

Davian: She probably can teach them something, you know. She's already got more archaeological experience than they do.

Félix: I'll tell you what, Belle. Why don't I let you have a few minutes to instruct the students tomorrow? You can be my assistant. We'll practice this evening so you'll know what you want to say when the time comes.

Belle: Yay! I'm going to be the best assistant you've ever had, I promise!

Félix: I have no doubt.

Belle: So, if I'm going to the site tomorrow and I'm going to be busy all day, does that mean I can skip my math lesson?

Davian: No. It means you'll have to do extra lessons the day after. Just because you're in the rainforest and you're learning cool stuff that isn't in your school books, that doesn't mean you get to ignore them. Remember, there's still going to be a test.

Belle: So, I guess the right choice would be to get ready for the test. I just wish I liked math more.

Félix: It's okay if you don't like it. Nobody can force you to like things. I'm not friends with math either, and when I was your age I was much happier following my father all around Al-Simhara and making discoveries with him. But I had to study math as well, because I needed it to graduate high school and get into university.

Belle: I'm going to university some day. I guess that means I have to be nice to math, even if we're not friends.

Félix: Be nice to math and it'll be nice to you.

Belle: *giggling* By helping me get into university?

Félix: Exactly so.

Belle: I can live with that.

Davian: Now that we've got that settled, how about we do a little exploring before dinner? I'll bet we can find some awesome butterflies if we take that trail over there. Check out all the flowers. I hear tropical butterflies love those.

Belle: Yes! Félix, can Davian and I borrow your camera? I want to take pictures if we see any butterflies. Then I can identify them and write a paragraph for my science journal.

Félix: That sounds like a good idea. While you and Davian are out butterfly hunting, I'm going to catch up with Dr. Santiago. I'll see the two of you at dinner at the field station.

Davian: Sounds good.

Belle: If we find any butterflies, we'll tell you all about it!

Félix: I can hardly wait. Good luck.

Belle: I think it's more about scientific methodology than luck.

Félix: *smiling* In that case... good scientific methodology, Professor Belle. I await your report on your findings.

[tomorrowusa]

The latest far right fad is raw milk. Perhaps they regard Louis Pasteur as a woke socialist. Seriously, government health advisories about raw milk only make it more attractive to the conspiracy theory fringe.

Commentators on sites like Infowars, Gab and Rumble have grown increasingly vocal about raw milk in recent weeks. They see the government’s heightened concerns about the dangers as overreach. “They say: ‘Bird flu in milk! Bird flu in milk! Oh, it’s the scariest thing!’” Owen Shroyer said on the April 29 episode of his “War Room” podcast from Infowars. He added: “They’ll just make raw milk illegal. That’s what this is all about.” Public health officials have long warned Americans of the severe health risks that can come with drinking raw milk instead of pasteurized milk, which is heated to kill bacteria, viruses and other germs. Researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found more than 200 disease outbreaks linked to unpasteurized milk from 1998 to 2018, leading to 2,645 illnesses, 228 hospitalizations and three deaths.

The far right, including anti-vaxxers, seems to have an affinity for pathogens. Either that or they feel that pathogens don't really exist and perhaps were made up by Hillary Clinton and George Soros. Whatever they think, don't expect them to make sense.

Contrary to claims, there’s little or no evidence that drinking raw milk provides health benefits, including protection from certain infectious diseases, said Dr. Megin Nichols, the deputy director of the Division of Foodborne, Waterborne and Environmental Diseases at the C.D.C. The Food and Drug Administration says pasteurizing milk kills the virus. The F.D.A. said in a statement that there are no scientifically proven benefits to drinking raw milk and that “the health risks are clear.”

Epidemics get rightwingers agitated. The latest bird flu outbreak has them acting like mad cows.

Matt Gertz, a senior fellow at Media Matters, a left-leaning watchdog that looked at the trend this month, said raw milk promotion had been intensifying on the right since the start of the bird flu outbreak. “What you have is a bunch of right-wing influencers who know that they can build substantial audiences and retain their audiences and excite their audiences by telling them that what medical authorities are saying about raw milk, about bird flu, is not credible,” Mr. Gertz said.

Basically the wingnuts are telling people: Don't trust science, trust Infowars instead! Paranoia is good for clicks.

As for bird flu, there is clear evidence of it being easily transmissible between mammals.

After mice drink raw H5N1 milk, bird flu virus riddles their organs

Despite the delusions of the raw milk crowd, drinking unpasteurized milk brimming with infectious avian H5N1 influenza virus is a very bad idea, according to freshly squeezed data published Friday in the New England Journal of Medicine. Researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison squirted raw H5N1-containing milk from infected cows into the throats of anesthetized laboratory mice, finding that the virus caused systemic infections after the mice were observed swallowing the dose. The illnesses began quickly, with symptoms of lethargy and ruffled fur starting on day 1. [ ... ] Before the mouse data, numerous reports have noted carnivores falling ill with H5N1 after eating infected wild birds. And a study from March in the journal Emerging Infectious Diseases reported that over half of the 24 or so cats on an H5N1-infected dairy farm in Texas died after drinking raw milk from the sick cows. Before their deaths, the cats displayed distressing neurological symptoms, and studies found the virus had invaded their lungs, brains, hearts, and eyes.

So we have bovines, rodents, and felines all being infected by H5N1. Several primates (i.e. humans) have also been infected. But generally, humans whose health practices are influenced by the germ theory of infection stand a darn good chance of avoiding it.

Fortunately, for the bulk of Americans who heed germ theory, pasteurization appears completely effective at deactivating the virus in milk, according to thorough testing by the FDA. Pasteurized milk is considered safe during the outbreak.

As with 17th century patriarchy and religious practices, the fringe right seems eager to return to the medical dark ages before germ theory and vaccination. In the century between 1870 and 1970 life expectancy almost doubled because of related discoveries. The far right seems to have some sort of death wish.

Vote for pro-science candidates. Support groups like 314 Action which are dedicated to electing candidates with a science background.

About Us - 3.14 Action

[magz]

New antibiotic kills pathogenic bacteria, spares healthy gut microbes

Article Date: May 29, 2024

Article Blurb: 

Researchers have developed a new antibiotic that reduced or eliminated drug-resistant bacterial infections in mouse models of acute pneumonia and sepsis while sparing healthy microbes in the mouse gut. The drug, called lolamicin, also warded off secondary infections with Clostridioides difficile, a common and dangerous hospital-associated bacterial infection, and was effective against more than 130 multidrug-resistant bacterial strains in cell culture.

[...]

Numerous studies have found that antibiotic-related disturbances to the gut microbiome increase vulnerability to further infections and are associated with gastrointestinal, kidney, liver and other problems.

[...] In a series of experiments, Muñoz designed structural variations of the Lol inhibitors and evaluated their potential to fight gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria in cell culture. One of the new compounds, lolamicin, selectively targeted some “laboratory strains of gram-negative pathogens including Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Enterobacter cloacae,” the researchers found. Lolamicin had no detectable effect on gram-positive bacteria in cell culture. At higher doses, lolamicin killed up to 90% of multidrug-resistant E. coli, K. pneumoniae and E. cloacae clinical isolates. 

When given orally to mice with drug-resistant septicemia or pneumonia, lolamicin rescued 100% of the mice with septicemia and 70% of the mice with pneumonia, the team reported.  

Extensive work was done to determine the effect of lolamicin on the gut microbiome. 

“The mouse microbiome is a good tool for modeling human infections because human and mouse gut microbiomes are very similar,” Muñoz said. “Studies have shown that antibiotics that cause gut dysbiosis in mice have a similar effect in humans.”

Treatment with standard antibiotics amoxicillin and clindamycin caused dramatic shifts in the overall structure of bacterial populations in the mouse gut, diminishing the abundance several beneficial microbial groups, the team found.

“In contrast, lolamicin did not cause any drastic changes in taxonomic composition over the course of the three-day treatment or the following 28-day recovery,” the researchers wrote. 

Many more years of research are needed to extend the findings, Hergenrother said. 

[More in Article]

Note: The main scientific journal itself is paywalled (and not yet available in unpaywall nor sci-hub), Nature Journal Link

[materialsscienceandengineering]

Researchers have taken the first steps toward finding liquid solvents that may someday help extract critical building materials from lunar and Martian-rock dust, an important piece in making long-term space travel possible. Using machine learning and computational modeling, Washington State University researchers have found about half a dozen good candidates for solvents that can extract materials on the moon and Mars usable in 3D printing. The work, reported in the Journal of Physical Chemistry B, is led by Soumik Banerjee, associate professor in WSU's School of Mechanical and Materials Engineering. The powerful solvents, called ionic liquids, are salts that are in a liquid state. "The machine learning work brought us down from the 20,000-foot to the 1,000-foot level," Banerjee said. "We were able to down select a lot of ionic liquids very quickly, and then we could also scientifically understand the most important factors that determine whether a solvent is able to dissolve the material or not."

Read more.

[gumjrop]

The Weather

Amid the CDC’s COVID-minimizing and dangerous rollback to isolation guidance, a new Pew Research poll shows that 27% of Americans are very or somewhat concerned that they will get COVID and require hospitalization, and 40% (nearly half) of Americans are very or somewhat concerned that they will unwittingly spread COVID to others. This number rises substantially for low income brackets, and Black, Hispanic, and Asian adults. Concern about hospitalization was highest in adults with a high school education or less. Despite efforts by the CDC, the Biden Administration, and corporate media to downplay the public’s concern about COVID, these numbers show that a substantial proportion of Americans care about protecting one another.

A popular program providing free rapid antigen tests through the USPS ended on March 9, 2024. Despite the limitations of rapid antigen tests, these home tests continue to be a vital way to quickly identify COVID cases, both to prevent further onward spread as well as to identify the need for treatment with Paxlovid. You can use our letter campaign to let your elected officials know we still need free rapid home tests.

COVID wastewater levels are decreasing, with no states registering “Very High” levels as of 3/15/2024. Eight states are currently at “High” and 15 are at “Moderate” levels of SARS-CoV-2 detected in wastewater.

Wastewater levels show a downward trend in the provisional data (gray shaded area) in all regions. The national wastewater levels are overall indicated as “Low.” Lower wastewater activity is an indication of lower overall viral spread, which is certainly a good thing. However, the “Low” designation is not a representation of low risk in our day-to-day lives, and continued masking and multilayered precautions continue to be necessary to protect ourselves and our communities. State and local trends can also provide additional information, where available.

A recent Axios article highlights the expanding broad utility of wastewater testing for COVID and other infectious diseases, as well as the uncertain footing of the funding and infrastructure for this essential surveillance tool. We encourage you to write your elected officials to let them know you want to keep and expand wastewater testing in your area and nationally.

Wins

On March 13, the People’s CDC hosted a press conference to push back on the CDC’s elimination of COVID isolation guidance and demand accountability to the public (watch the video or read the press release). The online publication (pre-proof) of the People’s CDC External Review in the peer-reviewed scientific journal American Journal of Preventive Medicine Focus was also announced, which is an important authoritative resource highlighting both shortcomings of the CDC’s approach and recommendations for a more transparent, effective, and equitable pandemic response going forward. The full External Review report can be found on the People’s CDC website.

March 15 was Long COVID Awareness Day, and Senator Bernie Sanders along with six cosponsors (Tim Kaine, Edward Markey, John Hickenlooper, Tina Smith, Robert Casey, and Tammy Baldwin) introduced Resolution 590 to formally recognize March 15 as Long COVID Awareness Day. You can ask your senators to support this resolution using this letter campaign. Senator Sanders released a video promising legislation to increase funding for Long COVID research and clinical care, as well as emphasizing the importance of prevention, including vaccination and masking. For more info on Long COVID Awareness Day, see the “Long COVID” section below.

When we make our voices heard, whether with the press, with scientific publications, or with elected officials, we win.

Variants

In the CDC’s most recent Nowcast predictions, JN.1 continues to be the most prevalent variant in the United States (86.5%), with a predicted decrease in JN.1 and sublineage JN.1.13 increasing (9.5%).

Vaccines

The CDC has recommended spring boosters for people age 65 and older, at least 4 months after the previous updated dose. As of 3/2/2024, only about 42.4% of adults age 65 and older had gotten an updated vaccine, and many who were vaccinated in the fall may not realize they are eligible for another dose. 

In addition to the spring boosters recommended for people aged 65 and older, immunocompromised people are eligible for more frequent vaccination. The CDC states, “You can self-attest to your moderately or severely immunocompromised status, which means you do not need any documentation of your status to receive COVID-19 vaccines you might be eligible to receive.”

As a reminder, the currently available COVID vaccine formulations (2023-2024, first available in fall 2023) are effective against the JN.1 variant, with about 54% protection against symptomatic disease. For people of all ages, immunity wanes after 6 months, and, although current eligibility is more limited, we continue to support access to vaccination at least every 6 months for all ages.

If you have not received one of the updated COVID vaccines released last Fall, you can use this tool to find local vaccine providers that are Bridge Access Participants. The Bridge program is currently available through December 31, 2024. 

COVID in Kids

In a recent report in the CDC’s MMWR publication, cases of Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C) in 2023 were highlighted. MIS-C is an inflammatory response to a COVID infection that usually occurs 2-6 weeks following an infection. MIS-C may be serious and can affect the heart, lungs, kidneys, brain, skin, eyes, or gastrointestinal tract. Although rates of MIS-C have slowed since 2020-2021, 112 cases were reported in 2023, with 82.1% of those occurring in unvaccinated children. Among cases in vaccinated children, 60% occurred in children who had not received a booster within the last year. As of 3/2/2024, only about 13.5% of eligible children aged 6 months to 17 years have received a 2023-2024 COVID vaccine. More info on Long COVID in kids is presented below under “Long COVID.” 

It is clear that kids need protection from COVID, and current efforts are inadequate. We demand that public health authorities take action to protect our children. You can find more information to support protecting kids in our Urgency of Equity toolkit.

Long COVID

March 15 marked the second annual International Long Covid Awareness Day. Across the globe, Long Covid survivors, their allies, and the community fight for increased research, treatment, and visibility for people living with Long Covid. 

Searching #LongCovidAwarenessDay on most social media platforms will connect you to posts from people all over the world describing their experience navigating their ongoing symptoms while trying to educate others about the barriers they face in seeking accessible and effective treatments.

Up to 5.8 million children in the US may be affected by Long COVID. A recent study published in the journal Pediatrics from the American Academy of Pediatrics shows that vaccination reduces the risk of Long COVID in children by about 40%. 

Take Action

Super Tuesday has come and gone with nominees in most parties now established for races at the local, state, and national level later this year on November 5th.

People’s CDC wants to remind you that regardless of the outcomes of these elections, we must always continue to organize and fight back against the state’s abandonment of science in favor of corporate interests.

We urge you to use and share our letter campaign demanding that elected officials renew and expand programs to provide free Rapid Antigen Tests (RATs). You can also continue to urge elected officials to support maintaining and extending COVID isolation guidance via our letter campaign. Over 13,000 letters have already been sent, and you can use the same template to send follow up letters.

Whether it’s joining a local mutual aid organization or fighting for increased accessibility measures (required masking, improved air quality, and multilayered precautions) in groups you are already part of, your actions can make your communities safer for all people.

[pinkcupboardwitch]

genuine question, where would you recommend someone start with improving media literacy and critical thinking skills? :o

I love this question! Thank you - it really pushed me to figure out how to distill my own process, so it was very helpful for me too.

“Media literacy” is such a big topic that it can very easily get overwhelming, so I would recommend finding a specific type of media you want to practice these skills in first. This is handy because 1) it breaks the learning process up into a much more manageable goal 2) a lot of the mindsets you acquire here will be helpful once you start branching out into different media types, even if the specifics of that genre might be different.

For example, I’m a historian; I’m trained to read both historical documents and texts produced by other professional historians with an eye for particular characteristics. My personal specialty is the study of historical gender and medicine, which means that even when I’m reading texts from periods outside my own, or even modern media, I can pick up synergies of gender and/or medicine more intuitively than others. A really fun example of this is when I watched Blue Eye Samurai with a friend who is also a historian of the same period as I am, but with a focus on religion. A very obvious flag to me that Mizu is queer in some way is that they only realized they were attracted to [censored for spoilers] when they witnessed two men kissing. When I brought that up to my friend, he said he had completely missed that thread. He is, however, continually able to bring in sociological arguments that I miss, because he’s trained to see those patterns and I’m not.

A less intimidating way to approach these skills then, which are often very vaguely defined and have a reflexive anxiety about them because they feature so often in grading rubrics without being clearly defined, is pattern matching. Are you able to identify the patterns the authors are drawing on? And are you able to draw new connections between these texts that are unique to you?

Examples of specific specialties you might be interested as a way to get started could include political journalism, scientific reports, historical texts, or romance novels, to give you an example of the balance between specificity and generalization I usually find helpful. Once you have your set, start reading as many examples of that as you can. It’s more helpful to consume this material consistently, rather than amass a huge source base in a very short period of time. The goal here is to start picking up on patterns between the various examples you’re reading. Patterns of shared values, of similar ways of constructing an argument or a message, of different conversations going in between the authors of this shared space.

“Active reading” tends to get a bad rap because I think a lot of us have bad memories of being told simply to do it without ever being explained what it actually is or how to tell if we’re doing it. But it is a very useful tool. Instead of simply taking in information (that is, “passive” reading), we engage in a conversation with the information as we read. I find that the following is a handy checklist for me when I read material that’s new to me:

- What is the author’s message? How can I tell?

- Why are they presenting this message? Do their stated goals match their implicit goals, or is there a mismatch? How can I tell?

- Who is the message for? How can I tell?

- Do I agree with this message completely? With some parts of this message but not others? Not at all? Why? And how can I tell?

- If I don’t agree in part or entirely, what is my stance on the issue? (“I need more information to know my stance” is a perfectly good one to have)

(Note: this is biased towards my training as a historian. Someone trained in a different field, or even in a different method of doing history than I am, would likely have a different answer. But I find that this set is flexible enough to be used in many different contexts, not just academic ones.)

That “how can I tell” is, for me, the crux of the matter. Being able to answer that question pushes us to really pick apart the different strands of a text and helps us see the overall meaning of that text as something that is constructed, not inherent.

At first, you might need to consciously have this list next to you as a reminder whenever you’re reading your text of choice. You might even need to read a particular text multiple times, each time focusing on a single question from the list instead of juggling all five parts at the same time because it’s so hard to find those answers. That is totally fine! More than fine, it’s normal.

Eventually, as you get more and more comfortable with practicing this kind of thinking and reading, you’ll be able to do it in a way that’s less conscious and more like muscle memory. This also means that over time, it will get less tiring. Which is to say - at the start of this practice, it will be tiring, mentally and physically so. That doesn’t mean you’re lazy or stupid. It just means this is a part of your brain that’s starting a new exercise routine and is slowly building up endurance. “Learning things” is a skill in itself, and something that we can also practice and get better at. I know some very smart people who are terrible at learning new things and being beginners, because they’re so used to excelling at a very narrow sphere of activities.

This is such a long response already, but I hope it is helpful and makes sense! Just two more points for now, and please also feel free to jump back into my inbox or DMs if you have more questions about this.

Firstly, a very useful strategy I have found for getting more literate in genres and ways of thinking I am not familiar with is to ask an expert in that field to “check your work”. For me, this is scientific articles and @dr-dendritic-trees. Again, I’m a historian, I wasn’t trained to read science reports in any field, but I still want to parse the interesting science that comes my way. In the early stages of getting familiar with science writing, “checking my work” usually looked like me sending an article her way, asking her to translate it into layman’s terms, and then, armed with that prior explanation, reading the article myself to see if I could understand how she’d gotten there. As I got more familiar with the particular kinds of thinking that scientists are trained to do, I started reading the articles first, reaching a tentative conclusion, and then asking her if she agreed (example: “Their conclusion feels fishy to me but I can’t fully say why. Would you say that’s right?”). The goal here is not simply to acquire new scientific information. The goal is to practice thinking like a scientist.

(Incidentally, this approach is also why I encourage my students to use SparkNotes or Wikipedia if they’re really struggling with a particular text so they can get a summary of what’s happening. Once you know what’s happening, you can focus on the much more interesting and critical aspect: how the argument is constructed and how you can tell).

Secondly, Toulmin’s Method is another handy checklist for breaking down arguments that you can use as an alternative to or in conjunction with the checklist I provided above. I’ve taught it in my own classes and a particularly handy exercise I like to do with them is to practice going, “I agree with your X because ABC, and I disagree with your Y because DEF.” [example: “I agree with your claim because my own experience backs that up, but I disagree with your warrant because you’re falsely connecting these two elements.”]

This is so long! Thank you for asking the question and for reading all this! It’s probably pretty obvious that I care deeply about this topic*. This is a hard skill to pick up, especially if you haven’t consciously worked these mental muscles out in a while, but it’s also a profoundly valuable one, and one that greatly enriches our lives as people in a shared and communal world. I wish you the best of luck on your journey of practice!!

*for extra credit: how can you tell? ;)

EDIT: I said I only had two points left, posted this, and then immediately thought of two other exercises that are very helpful for practicing these skills! One, learn to write a précis, which is a very formal, four-sentence summary that is extremely helpful for organizing your thoughts. Two, learn to identify logical fallacies. A really central part of critical thinking is being able to recognize when others are not thinking critically and explain why.

[covid-safer-hotties]

University of Alberta researchers retract COVID study, citing multiple errors - Published Sept 6, 2024

Incidence of pediatric long COVID higher than had been reported in JAMA Pediatrics

A University of Alberta study on long COVID in children has been retracted.

The study found a "strikingly low" incidence of long COVID among children ages eight to 13 who contracted COVID-19.

However, during a review of their results, the authors discovered a key figure was incorrect.

The researchers had focused on a group of 271 children who tested positive for COVID and for whom there was sufficient data to determine the presence of long COVID.

Of that group of kids, only one — or 0.4 per cent — met the World Health Organization's definition of the condition, according to the study.

Incidence of long COVID 'strikingly low' in children, Alberta researchers find But after review, the authors found the actual incidence of long COVID in children and teens in the study group, is 1.4 per cent — or four out of 286 rather than one out of 271.

The authors of the article, published in JAMA Pediatrics, requested a retraction because they identified "methodological (analytical) errors" in their original report.

Dr. Piush Mandhane, a professor with the department of pediatrics at the University of Alberta, wrote a retraction note on behalf of his co-authors.

In the note, Mandhane explained that the errors impacted the researchers' estimate of prevalence of long COVID in children and adolescents and the "reported associations between pre- and post-COVID-19 symptoms."

"We identified a coding error whereby children with missing symptoms data were coded as having no symptoms. This error resulted in two participants being misclassified as having symptom resolution when they should have been classified as having [long COVID]," Mandhane wrote in the retraction note.

After the original study was published, the authors classified another child as having long COVID.

Other errors included the exclusion of 15 participants who should have been included in the study, and counting participants who fell outside the sample's age range of eight to 13 years old.

"We identified participants with COVID-19 [cases] who were recruited between one and 7.49 years and 14.5 and 19 years of age," Mandhane wrote in the retraction note.

There were other coding errors.

"We apologize to the readers and editors of JAMA Pediatrics for these errors," Mandhane wrote in the note.

"In discussion with the editors, who shared their concerns about the analyses and data reported, we are requesting a retraction of our research letter. All the authors of our research letter are in agreement with this retraction," Mandhane wrote.

JAMA Pediatrics is part of the JAMA Network, a group of medical scientific journals owned and published by the American Medical Association.

JAMA Pediatrics claims its impact factor is 24.7, which makes it the highest ranking pediatrics journal in the world.

JAMA Network declined to provide comment for this story.

"We believe the retraction letter from Dr. Mandhane speaks for itself," a public information officer for JAMA said in an email.

Dr. Kieran Quinn, a clinician-scientist at the Sinai Health System in Toronto, said in an interview that "it's important to acknowledge that research is a very difficult and sometimes messy endeavour."

"I commend the authors on their thoroughness in identifying these errors in their analysis and in transparently fixing them," Quinn said.

"In this case, they felt, along with the editors of the journal, that the errors were sufficient and numerous enough that they should actually retract the article rather than just correct it and update the analysis, which isn't always the case.

"I think that's actually an acknowledgement that they are good researchers and they're doing this in an ethical and responsible approach."

[beta-lactam-allergic]

Has anyone else read about the Mayan city that was recently discovered using LIDAR. I first saw it in WIRED & ABC News (the Australian one, though I think the American one will probably also have an article on it).

Anyway here is the link to the original paper, because mainstream media can be pretty bad at interpreting scientific papers. They actually did a good job this time, but you should be in the practice of finding the source journals & bypassing pay walls if you encounter one but can't afford to pay up ("I wanted to read these articles" isn't an excuse landlords accept) rather than just trusting non-science media to not screw up on science reporting.