Category: Uncategorized

Save the sashimi: rising mercury levels in Hawaiian ahi indicate a global problem

Broiled, blackened, seared or raw, ahi is one of America's most popular seafoods. But a new study suggests toxic mercury levels in tuna are on the rise, and may cause serious problems in decades to come. Photo by Angelo DeSantis c/o Wikimedia Commons
Broiled, blackened, seared or raw, ahi tuna is one of America’s most popular seafoods. But a new study suggests toxic mercury levels in tuna are on the rise, and may cause serious problems in decades to come. Photo by Angelo DeSantis c/o Wikimedia Commons

Tuna are some of the most popular fishes on Earth. Globally, more than 4.3 million tonnes of tuna are caught every year, valued at more than $5.5 billion dollars. Yellowfin tuna, the species most commonly labeled as ahi in sushi restaurants nationwide, is the preferred tuna in developed nations like the US and the UK, but the world’s favorite sashimi may soon be stricken from the menu, as scientists have found that mercury levels in tuna are rising at a rate of 3.8% or more annually. More importantly, the rapid rise suggests a growing global problem that may lead to unsafe mercury levels in many fishes, even ones that are now considered completely safe. Continue reading “Save the sashimi: rising mercury levels in Hawaiian ahi indicate a global problem”

Plants vs Everything

In December, I had the amazing opportunity to spend almost two weeks in the Peruvian Amazon at the Tambopata Research Center to do research for a book I’m writing on venoms.

The Amazon is home to some of the most notorious venomous animals on Earth. There’s the bullet ant: an animal whose venom is so painful, it is said to be like getting shot. Then there are the wandering spiders: large, aggressive arachnids known for their deadly bite. And that’s not even getting into the various snakes with venoms potent enough to kill in less than an hour.

But while I was expecting the cornucopia of venomous animals, I was completely unprepared—and amazed—by the array of defenses employed by the Amazon’s flora. It seemed even the most gentle of plant species was armed with some kind of spine or spike, and if it wasn’t, you could pretty much bet it had enlisted an army of ants instead.

Continue reading “Plants vs Everything”

Science Sushi: 2014 In Review

Wfc_pyrotechnic_display

It’s that time of the year again where I look back and see what has happened over the past 365 days in the life of this blog. So far in 2014…

…I have posted 33 posts

…that received over four hundred thousand views

…from 218 countries/territories

…with 595 comments

The most popular post of the year was my scathing interrogation of Discovery Channel’s nefarious tactics, with my complete shredding of Sharkageddon not far behind.  Second most popular was my step-by-step analysis of the death of Marius the giraffe. Last year’s posts on how dolphins might not be getting high on tetrodotoxin and my open letter to Discovery Channel for their terrible Megalodon fauxmentary stayed in the top ten this year. Other critiques also did very well, as my comments on George Will and Rosie O’Donnell also landed in the top ten. Other popular posts included 19 things more deadly than sharks at the beach, why the trust hormone increases deceit, and how sea stars see.

It's 'Dr. Wilcox' now!
It’s ‘Dr. Wilcox’ now!

Perhaps the highlight of the blogging year, though, was winning the second place prize in the 3 Quarks Daily Science Prize, The Strange Quark, for my piece and about how allergies may have evolved to save your life. I’ve also been busy outside of the blog—I successfully defended my dissertation this month, exchanging “Ms.” for “Dr.”. The Complete Guide to Science Blogging, which I am co-editing with Bethany Brookshire and Jason Goldman, will hopefully be coming out near the end of 2015, and I’m in the final stages of writing my first non-fiction pop-science book on venoms. I just got back from almost two weeks in the Peruvian Amazon—stay tuned for more stories from that next year.

Overall, it’s been an incredible year, and I look forward to the challenges, surprises, and joys of the year to come. Thank you to all of you who read this blog: let’s keep this bio-nerdy party going all through 2015!

 

Fireworks image (c) Mark Wooding, from Wikipedia

 

Tear Gas: the chemical warfare agent used on demonstrators in Ferguson

The clash between police and protestors in Ferguson, Missouri has escalated significantly over the past few days. Police dogs and handguns have been swapped out for tanks and assault rifles. The protestors are being shot at with rubber bullets and wooden baton rounds, but perhaps the most disturbing images surfacing are those of police suppressing peaceful assembly with tear gas. Currently banned for use in international warfare, tear gas is still legal to use domestically, and has become a go-to for riot control. To understand what the use of tear gas means for the citizens, members of the press, and government officials currently in Ferguson, here is a scientific explainer of what tear gas is, what it does, and what scientists and medical professionals think of its use.

 

 

Continue reading “Tear Gas: the chemical warfare agent used on demonstrators in Ferguson”

It’s SHARK WEEK! What should you expect from this year’s fin fest?

f2d04871.discovery-logoTonight kicks off Shark Week, the longest-running television event in history. As readers of this blog know, many scientists (myself included) have become critical of Discovery’s beloved television event, criticizing their PR tactics, shark attack fearmongering, and overall lack of facts, science and conservation throughout the week.

Though the concerns have been brewing for the past decade or so, last year’s ‘documentary’ on C. megalodon shoved the Shark Week science—or lack thereof—into the national media spotlight. Discovery believes they did nothing wrong with presenting “one of the most debated shark discussions of all time“, however, scientists and viewers alike protested loudly about the special on and offline to the point that CNN and other major news stations covered the controversy. Supporting the notion that ‘any press is good press’, last year’s Shark Week was the most viewed of all time.

This year, Discovery claims they have responded to the strong public and media backlash. Laurie Goldberg, executive vice president of public relations for Discovery, tweeted to explain that concerns over the scientific content of this year’s Shark Week are unfounded, as “most” of the programming is fact-based. Curious if that is true, I pulled up Discovery’s day-by-day plan and examined the shows’ descriptions. I categorized them as ‘science-based’ or ‘fear-based’ using the wording in the description and whether it mentioned scientists or research (particularly as the ‘host’ or focus). I then tweeted my predictions (Storify below). Here’s the summary table:

Updated 8/10 to add Fake to Shark of Darkness.
Updated 8/10 to add fake label to Shark of Darkness after airing.
Continue reading “It’s SHARK WEEK! What should you expect from this year’s fin fest?”

19 Real Reasons Not To Go To The Beach This Summer

Last week, BuzzFeed published an article titled “19 Reasons Not To Go To The Beach This Summer.” In reality, the article contained only one reason—and as they hinted, it “rhymes with shmarks.”

Annnnd @BuzzFeed publishes a shark scare-mongering piece that has GIFs but no intelligence http://t.co/u5LQme36dO Ugh. cc @BuzzFeedBen

— Kyle Hill (@Sci_Phile) June 20, 2014

Not surprisingly, the article—which BuzzFeed Editor-in-Chief Ben Smith claimed was meant as a “parody”—upset a lot of shark scientists, science communicators, and BuzzFeed readers. Yet BuzzFeed stuck to their guns, saying that clearly, those who find the article distasteful lack a sense of humor and simply don’t get the joke.

Shark fearmongering – et tu, @BuzzFeed? Any comment on this, @BuzzFeedBen? http://t.co/Y2ofE0yL0E

— Christie Wilcox (@NerdyChristie) June 19, 2014

 

@NerdyChristie @WhySharksMatter so you read this as a column advising Americans to avoid beaches? — Ben Smith (@BuzzFeedBen) June 20, 2014

 

@BuzzFeedBen @NerdyChristie @WhySharksMatter No, I read this as a post perpetuating the myth that sharks are mindless killing machines.

— Katharine The Shark (@Shark_Katharine) June 21, 2014

 

We got it, BuzzFeed—we just didn’t think it was funny.

“Jokes” like this one (and the very real fear that BuzzFeed is “mocking”) are part of why so many shark species are declining or already threatened. The idea that sharks are dangerous, deadly, and otherwise unwelcome where we want to swim is devastatingly common. The pervasive, irrational fear of sharks isn’t something to make light of, particularly when such fear has real consequences for wildlife conservation. For example, the fear of shark attacks on beaches is what the Western Australian government used to justify implementing a massive shark cull that more than 100 shark scientists and 2/3 of Western Australians oppose. So far, the cull has cost over a million dollars and killed more non-target sharks than targeted ones, yet the government still plans to continue the cull for years to come.

Besides, if you’re going to make light of death at the beach, you should at least make it statistically valid. Maybe you should fear the beach—but not because of the Chondrichthyes beneath the waves. Sharks generally avoid people, and even when they don’t, the odds that you’ll be killed by a shark are unbelievably low. Since the 1500s, there have been less than 500 fatal shark attacks worldwide. Sharks kill less than five people every year globally and less than one person per year in the US. As the Dodo pointed out, there are far deadlier things to be afraid of.

Of the many reasons why beaches aren’t safe, sharks are the least of your worries. To show you what I mean, I present to you 19 beachy things that are more likely to kill you than sharks—in proper BuzzFeed form.

Continue reading “19 Real Reasons Not To Go To The Beach This Summer”

Science Matters: Why George Will’s Math Is Wrong

George "let me do the math" Will. Photo by Keith Allison
George “let me do the math” Will.
Photo by Keith Allison

In a recent opinion piece for The Washington Post, George Will decided to do a little math based on two “crucial and contradictory” statistics mentioned in the President’s recent report:

A. 20% of college women are sexually assaulted during their tenure at the university, and
B. 12% of rapes are reported to law enforcement

His overall message is that, clearly, women are lying about being assaulted to gain the “privilege” of victimhood, based on this mathematical argument:

The statistics are: One in five women is sexually assaulted while in college, and only 12 percent of assaults are reported. Simple arithmetic demonstrates that if the 12 percent reporting rate is correct, the 20 percent assault rate is preposterous. Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute notes, for example, that in the four years 2009 to 2012 there were 98 reported sexual assaults at Ohio State. That would be 12 percent of 817 total out of a female student population of approximately 28,000, for a sexual assault rate of approximately 2.9 percent — too high but nowhere near 20 percent.

Or, to put it into math equations:

98 reported assaults (at Ohio State) = 12% of the assaults that occurred

98 / 0.12 = 817 (total assaults)

817 / 28,000 = 0.029;

which means only 2.9% of the 28,000 female students at Ohio State have been assaulted.

Therefore, the 20% statistic is far too high, thus women must be lying about assault.

Here’s the thing: experimental design matters when it comes to statistics. There are several ways you can go wrong when interpreting statistics, any of which can be accounted for if you simply pay attention to the science that generated them—which George clearly didn’t. Continue reading “Science Matters: Why George Will’s Math Is Wrong”

Emptying The Ocean: Trawling Leading To Deep Ocean Deserts

The more research is conducted on the effects of trawling, the harder it is to make a case for why it is allowed—anywhere, ever. It’s especially hard to argue for high seas bottom trawling, the kind that dredges up roughly twice the area of the United States every year and, since the United Nations couldn’t agree on terms, is currently unregulated. Now, a study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences adds to the mounting evidence that our hunger for piscine protein is laying waste to parts of the planet we have never even seen, leading to lasting changes in the sea floor that prevent recovery.

Deep_desert_PLoS
Trawls are bulldozing millions of square miles of the sea floor every year. A new study in PNAS says that if such fishing is sustained, this is all that will be left. Image from Gewin 2004

Continue reading “Emptying The Ocean: Trawling Leading To Deep Ocean Deserts”

White Hot Insects: Climate Change Leading to Lighter Colors

Pieris_mannii
Lighter wins as climate warms: this butterfly, the Southern Small White (Pieris mannii), has continuously expanded its range northwards during the past ten years. Image c/o Nature Communications

Most of the discussion on climate change focuses on startling images of potential loss: the city of Miami underwater due to rising sea level or the lone polar bear on an ever-shrinking iceberg. But some of the greatest impacts of our continued inability to curb our carbon appetite are surprisingly small—little changes that may ultimately have big implications. It’s the butterfly effect—except, in this case, I literally am talking about butterflies.  Continue reading “White Hot Insects: Climate Change Leading to Lighter Colors”

April Sci-shimi: Penis Wars and Angry Birds

Welcome to Sci-shimi, my monthly roundup of  great science online! Like a delicious, fresh platter of sashimi, these tasty links are meant to be shared —どうぞめしあがれ ! 

This month’s mind-blowing science moment: An insect where the female does the penetrating during mating with a sexual organ never before described. Is it a penis? Ed says yes, Annalee says no. What do you think?

Best long-read: What’s in a name? Susan Milius explores fungal taxonomy.

Runner up: Angry Birds Part 1, Barbarism From Above by Jake Buehler. Think birds are fluffy and cute? Think again. (And don’t say I didn’t warn you it is a LONG read…)

Continue reading “April Sci-shimi: Penis Wars and Angry Birds”