5 things politicians can learn from Scientists:

On the 7th of May 2015 the United Kingdom will hold a general election and party political campaigns are now in full swing. As a voter who is currently undecided, I’m fervently rifling through political literature and attempting to navigate jargon as I make my decision. But, as a scientist, I can’t help but feel that politicians aren’t making this decision easy for me. In a funny way, my world is pretty simple. In science, evidence and logic are key and we attempt to follow these to their conclusions. But this seems to be a far cry from the murky world of politics where evidence can be manipulated and jargon and rhetoric hold sway. So, as a public service, I present a list of five things politicians could learn from scientists.

1) There are lies, damn lies and political statistics:

6225881707_9afb3cc3bb_z(1)We live in a world abound with data – from traffic cameras to Google Analytics, computers the world over store vast amounts of information about our lives and the world we inhabit. This is no bad thing of course – knowledge has the power to make the world a better place. However, in unscrupulous or untrained hands, it can also deceive and manipulate.

Data is the currency that scientists deal in and, over the years, we have learned to handle it with care since things are often not exactly how they appear. But, what happens when big data and political aspirations collide?

Any trained orator knows that a light peppering of statistics can seal the deal during a debate, or at least muddy the water enough to breed uncertainty. But, how often do we hear similar sounding stats wheeled out by opposing parties and hailed as proof of very different ideals? Numbers can provide very important insights – but, depending on how you process the numbers, the same data can also give very different outcomes. Whether through honest errors in understanding (yes, numbers are tricky things) or by calculated deception, politicians often throw out dodgy stats in the hope of strengthening their argument and winning your vote – for a few examples see here.

In my opinion, the use of statistics in the current election campaign is doing little more than muddying the water and making the voters’ job significantly more challenging. How many people have the time or inclination to research every figure quoted? Statistics are very informative and key to most policies but, if they are to be used, politicians must also be clear about how the figures were obtained and why they may differ between parties.

2) The world isn’t black and white:

Wouldn’t life be great if all our problems had simple answers? For example, if we believed that all of our country’s financial and social problems could be solved by altering immigration laws, or if I could prepare for the upcoming ‘bikini season’ by simply popping a couple of magic diet pills. Sadly, the world is far from black and white, and oversimplification can often lead to misunderstanding and confusion.

Many voters may crave a ‘quick fix’ to our country’s social and economic problems, just like they may want to lose weight without diet or exercise, but that’s just not realistic! I want to know that policies have been formulated based on all available evidence and that – ‘God forbid’  – politicians are willing to recognise that these may not be perfect solutions and may even require modification in light of further evidence (see point 3). Although hyperbolic slogans may be appealing, it is well reasoned arguments based on clear, well explained facts that will allow voters to really understand the workings of the political machine and enable them to make an informed decision about their vote.

3) Changing your mind is nothing to be ashamed of:

How many times have you heard politicians being slated for performing ‘U-turns’? This phrase first gained media notoriety in the early 1970s when Prime Minister Ted Heath had to dump his free-market economic policy in the face of soaring inflation and rampant industrial action. This decision was viewed as an appalling show of weakness by the Tory right and, ever since, political U-turns have been widely derided by the media.

97338266_ed37f724df_zBut, during the current coalition government’s tenure, David and Co have reversed or rethought dozens of policies, from selling off Britain’s forests to taxing our favourite pastry-based snacks. Indeed, recent research by Ipsos Mori suggests that two-thirds of voters want a Prime Minister who acts mainly on the views and opinions of the general public when making decisions, rather than one who trusts solely in his own experience. In our dizzyingly complex world, I am heartened to know that policies are not set in stone and may be modified in the face of new evidence.

This is largely something scientists have been practicing for many years. In fact, all scientific theories are open for modification in the light of new evidence – many theories are widely accepted and would require extraordinary evidence to change but, given significant weight of evidence, anything is fair game. In the world of science, evidence is the one true king and this should also be true for politics. So, lets stop scoffing at political U-turns and be thankful when politicians admit to learning from their mistakes. In the words of Ghandi, “I am pleased when I change my mind because it shows that I have learned and grown wiser.”

4) Clarity is key:

As a scientist, I’m pretty used to sifting through technical jargon in scientific journals. And this is fine since, as a rule, this type of literature is aimed at scientists with a strong background in that particular field. However, as a science communicator, much of my time is spent agonising over ensuring that the material I communicate is accessible, truthful, representative and unambiguous. This is not an easy task but it’s 100% necessary if I want anyone (no matter what their background) to connect with the concepts I’m trying to communicate.

Sadly, I’m starting to think that many politicians enjoy being deliberately vague, evasive and inaccessible. My head spins with inscrutable statistics, vague and meaningless rhetoric, evasive noncommittal answers to seemingly simple questions and statements with little or no substance.

I recognise that, come May the 7th, the box I tick will be important for shaping the future of our country. So, is it too much to ask that politicians work hard to disambiguate their policies and structure their arguments around accessible facts and figures? In fact, sometimes the whole thing makes me question if any of the parties really know what they are talking about… As Einstein once said, “You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother”

5) Lets move forward rather than shifting blame:

One political tactic which never fails to drive me mad is when, instead of discussing policies on important economic or social issues, parties waste time blaming their competitors for past failings or denigrating their current policies. My personal view on this campaign tactic came to a head in 2011 with the referendum on the alternative voting system, of which (after reading into it) I was in favour.

In the lead up to the referendum, I was saddened to see how much campaign material avoided the interesting facts behind the vote, choosing instead to plaster campaign literature with pictures of the recently disgraced Nick Clegg. This material seemed to be saying, ‘Nick lied to you about tuition fees, he wants the alternative voting system and he can’t be trusted so it must be a bad thing’. Yes, there was more to the ‘No’ campaign than just Nick Clegg’s face, but this message certainly played a role despite having no relevance to the issues being debated.

Again, in the lead up to this year’s election, I’ve seen my fair share of dodgy and largely irrelevant muck slinging, which I will be ignoring in favour of party policies – here are a selection of some of my personal ‘favourite’ dodgy campaign posters:

image2
That’s great Conservatives, thanks for the heads up…but I think I may just read through Labour’s policies and decide for myself if I think they will ‘wreck’ our economy…(still think this one is calling out for a Miley Cyrus reference somewhere)
image1
Have they now Labour? Can I see some proof that this would have been different under your government….or even better, why don’t you just tell me how you plan on making things better now.

Now, I’d be lying if I said that all scientists doggedly hunt out the truth without holding any personal grudges or undermining one another’s work – we’re all human. But, in general, scientists gain funding to further their research by explaining how their work will benefit society and increase our understanding of the world, not by slamming other lab groups or accusing them of bad science. And that’s really how things should be.

So, as an undecided voter, I hope politicians will hear my plea… If you want my vote, come to me with clear, well reasoned, policies. Don’t treat me like an idiot and try to gain my support through hyperbole and muck slinging… I don’t expect you to have all the answers, but I do want you to explain your political stance clearly, listen to my views, base your policies on the best available evidence and to not be afraid of changing your stance in the light of new evidence.

Post by: Sarah Fox

But, scientists are far from perfect! for an alternative view and some advice on what scientists could learn from politicians, check out the new post by Ian Wilson, one of our friends at the Scouse Science Alliance.

Chocolate: the science of sweet

image1Rich, sweet and creamy with a sensuous ‘melt in the mouth’ texture. Chocolate is a guilty pleasure many of us share and, with Easter just around the corner, indulgence seems mandatory. But, what effect is our sweet tooth really having on our bodies and is there any scientific merit to claims that chocolate is actually good for us?

The medicinal use of chocolate has a long and rich history, with travel accounts and medical texts (dating from the 16th century) documenting a myriad of uses in the treatment of human disorders. These treatments range from the downright bizarre, to the infinitely plausible. For example:

Francisco Hernández (1577) wrote that pure cacao paste prepared as a beverage treated fever and liver disease. He also mentioned that toasted, ground cacao beans mixed with resin were effective against dysentery and that chocolate beverages were commonly prescribed to thin patients in order for them to gain “flesh.” William Hughes (1672) reported that coughs could be treated by drinking chocolate blended with cinnamon or nutmeg. While De Quélus (1718) wrote that drinking chocolate was nourishing and essential to good health. He said that drinking chocolate “repaired exhausted spirits,” preserved health, and prolonged the lives of old men. – For a more detailed overview of chocolate’s rich history, see here.

But do any of these claims hold water in the face of scientific scrutiny?

Chocolate: a way to the heart.

Dark chocolate and other cocoa products have, on a number of occasions, made the headlines as a dietary supplement and means to decrease blood pressure and modify other cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors (see here and here).

image2This line of research stemmed from observations among the Kuna Indian population in the san Blas Islands of Panama. Members of this population were seen to have particularly low rates of hypertension and CVD, coupled with an absence of age-related increases in blood pressure. Scientists theorised that theses unique medical traits were linked to high levels of cocoa intake amongst this group – On average Kuna Indians consume four 8-ounce cups of unprocessed cocoa drink per day!

One explanation for these findings is cocoa’s high flavanol content – which is thought to confer cardiovascular benefits through its effects on the circulatory system. Indeed, flavanol-rich cocoa may improve functionality of the bodies blood and lymph vessels and reduce various factors which may otherwise increase an individuals risk of CVD.

Alongside flavanols cocoa also contains an organic alkaloid compound called theobromine. The effects theobromine has on the body are pretty similar to those of caffeine, only slower to take effect – so perhaps a hot chocolate before bed time may not be a great idea. Alongside its caffeine-like properties, theobromine also acts as a cough suppressant, many ease the symptoms of asthma and, like flavinols, could improve cardiovascular health.

But, chocoholics beware, these findings do not prove that gorging on the brown stuff is actually good for our health. Firstly, the flavanol content of chocolate varies hugely depending on how the chocolate is processed. In fact, since flavanols are naturally bitter, these are usually thought of as unpalatable in the west and are generally reduced during the processing of our favourite chocolate treats. The cocoa powder consumed by the Kuna indians contains about 3.6% flavanols, while western chocolates range in their flavanol content – the highest being found in dark chocolate at 0.5%, while milk and white chocolate can sometimes be completely flavanol free. This means that, in commercially available chocolate products, the health benefits of flavanol are largely removed by the manufacturing process.

It’s also important to remember that most commercially available chocolate has a high caloric content and contains a significant amount of saturated fat and sugar. We know that excessive caloric intake can lead to some pretty adverse metabolic side effects (weight gain, diabetes perhaps even alzheimer’s disease) which probably negate any health benefits. This means that doctors would generally err against recommending chocolate as part of a healthy diet, with the possible exception of high quality dark chocolate.

So when it comes to a healthy body, the science of chocolate is not exactly black and white (or dark and milk) but, what about the effect it can have on the mind?

Chocolate on the brain:

in 1718 De Quélus wrote that chocolate can “repair exhausted spirits” and many people claim that indulging in the brown stuff can indeed be the perfect cure for low mood. But, how does chocolate effect the brain and, is the hedonistic pleasure of a good binge physical or psychological?

Chocolate consumption has been linked with a number of neurotransmitter systems, which play an active role in appetite, reward and mood regulation (including dopamine, serotonin and endorphins). However, there is currently insufficient evidence that these effects are specific to chocolate, or that they have an overall positive effect on mood.

340234_10100270433865775_1275067435_oInterestingly, although chocolate and junk food are regularly cited as the ‘go-to’ home remedy for malaise, extensive studies fail to find any real or lasting benefits to these binges. In fact, the opposite may be true, as often the guilt associated with a binge can leave sufferers feeling much worse!

So sadly, although a nice chunk of chocolate may provide brief pleasure and comfort, in the long term it’s more likely to prolong rather than abort a low mood.

So, chocolate is a mixed blessing. There’s almost certainly no harm in the occasional indulgence and, when it comes to high cocoa content dark chocolate it could even be beneficial. But, when it comes to our health, chocolate should definitely be considered a treat and not a lifestyle. That said, it won’t stop me enjoying my easter eggs this year!

Post by: Sarah fox

A brief history of getting your groove on:

6975100728_d9edb36f91_zWhether you’re a fan of classical quartets or acid house, one thing is certain; we all love a good tune! Music has the amazing ability to drive our emotions, bring people together and encourage us to dance till dawn. But why should this be the case? It’s easy to understand how pleasure can be derived from food and sex and why bereavement makes us sad. But, what is so special about music? The ability to write a good tune has no evolutionary advantage….or does it?

Novel research from our own fair city (Manchester) is now combining evolutionary biology, physics and neuroscience in an attempt to uncover the mysteries of music and its effect on the brain. This work, led by academic and musician Dr. Neil Todd, has uncovered a biological pathway linking sound, movement and pleasure in the brain. This pathway may have remained elusive for so many years because of its unusual origins. Neil has found evidence that, contrary to the traditional textbook theories, the cochlea is not the only sensory organ in the inner ear capable of responding to sound. His research suggests that the vestibular apparatus, normally associated with balance and spatial orientation, is also sensitive to certain frequencies of sound.

ROSERENASSThis may seem like a kooky idea but, viewed from an evolutionary standpoint, it actually makes perfect sense. In mammalian anatomy, we know that the cochlea is responsible for perception of sound. But, looking back down the evolutionary scale we find that this organ is not always present. Taking bony fish as an example, we find no sign of a cochlea. But, fish are far from deaf; in fact they use their otolith organs (part of the vestibular system) to detect vibrations. Similar to the human cochlea, the fish otolith organ contains an array of tiny hair-cells which can detect vibrations and translate these into a sensation of sound. Alongside fish, there are also many further examples of creatures utilising their vestibular sensors as sound detectors. So, there’s certainly evolutionary precedence for a mammalian vestibular sound processor. But, can humans use this system to perceive sound and, if so, why might this be advantageous?

Using electrodes which measured electrical signals from the neck and eyes (specifically from muscles responsive to vestibular activation). Neil found that the human vestibular system was sensitive to air-conducted sound frequencies ranging from 50-1000Hz, peaking between 300 and 350Hz – just above middle C on a musical scale and a similar frequency to male and female voices. For head vibration the peak sensitivity is even lower, at around 100 Hz. Taking this work one step further, Neil’s group wired up a number of participants looking at electrical activity in the brain and vestibular activated neck/eye muscles simultaneously. This method enabled the group to discern how responses in the brain differed between sounds which activated the vestibular system and those which didn’t. It was discovered that sounds falling within vestibular-activating frequency bands caused activity in auditory cortex and cingulate limbic areas, as well as sub-cortical areas traditionally associated with vestibular activation. This strongly suggests that certain sounds can indeed activate the human vestibular system, but why might this be useful?

Once again peering back through our evolutionary past, we find that many creatures use vestibular-activating sounds as mating signals. Have you ever heard a fish sing? Well, he may not get a turn from the judges on ‘the Voice’, but the male Haddock is one of the most vocal of fish and he uses his alluring voice to snag himself a mate. Male haddock vocalise by drumming on their swim bladder and, if surrounding females, are charmed by this song the music can cause both fish to simultaneously release eggs and sperm. Again, it seems that many creatures use this sense when finding a mate, and many also accompany this behaviour with a kind of dance. Therefore, it is possible that the vestibular sound-sensing system represents an ancient pathway used in mating behaviour – perhaps similar to the recently discovered vomeronasal system used to choose a mate based on pheromones and smell.

6307084759_7527ac5fef_zSo, perhaps our love of music and the intoxicating atmosphere of nightclubs could be the upshot of an ancient evolutionary system linked with fundamental mating behaviour.

Post by: Sarah Fox

E-cigarettes – What’s the harm?

Portrait of woman smoking with electronic cigaretteI’ve recently noticed a wealth of articles exploring the potential for harm associated with ‘smoking’ E-Cigarettes (also known as vaping) – for a few examples see here, here and here. But, with vaping steadily on the rise* what is the bigger picture?

One thing we can all agree on is that smoking cigarettes is pretty dam bad for you; certainly, the facts and figures associated with this habit don’t make for pleasant reading…

In brief:

  • There are about one billion smokers worldwide, of whom about half will die prematurely as a direct consequence of smoking.
  • Smoking currently accounts for around 100,000, or about one in six, deaths each year in the UK.
  • Smoking causes around 85% of the approximately 40,000 cases of (and deaths from) lung cancer in the UK each year. What’s more, smoking also contributes to the development of many other cancers, including oral cavity cancer, oesophageal and gastric cancer, kidney and bladder cancers, and pancreatic cancer.

…for more startling stats see here.

With this in mind, it’s worth noting that electronic cigarettes have traditionally been marketed as a ‘less harmful’ alternative to smoking and, in some cases, a stepping stone on the path to quitting the habit entirely. But what are they, what are the associated risks and are they really safer than conventional cigarettes?

image2Electronic cigarettes are designed to provide a measured dose of inhaled nicotine, whilst also mimicking the experience of smoking a conventional cigarette. Early models looked almost identical to normal cigarettes, with most even incorporating a realistic glowing tip. However, newer products come in all kinds of shape and sizes.

The most important difference between e-cigarettes and the real deal is the method of nicotine delivery. A regular cigarette burns tobacco and the user inhales the resulting nicotine-rich smoke, along with any associated nasties. E-cigarettes, however, produce a vapour by heating a solution of nicotine mixed with propylene glycol or glycerine. This method of nicotine delivery means that users still get the desired effect from the vapour but, without many of the toxic side effects associated with cigarette smoke.

It is now widely accepted that nicotine itself carries no serious health implications and is likely to be no more harmful than caffeine (for studies see here, here and here). The main problem with cigarettes is that they deliver their nicotine hit alongside a staggering array of carcinogens and toxins. These include: nitrosamines, acetone, acetylene, DDT, lead, radioactive polonium, hydrogen cyanide, methanol, arsenic and cadmium and vapour phase toxins such as carbon monoxide.

Since e-cigarettes do not burn tobacco, they do not deliver such a large doses of associated nasties. However, this does not mean that they’re harmless. Studies reveal that e-cigarettes contain small amounts of formaldehyde and acetaldehyde (both known human carcinogens); they can also deliver trace levels of carcinogenic nitrosamines, and some toxic metals such as cadmium, nickel and lead. A quick scan of the literature suggests that levels of these substances can vary hugely between e-cig brands, however, most studies agree that levels are generally low and are almost always significantly below those delivered by traditional cigarettes. Also, unlike traditional cigarette smoke, there appears to be little harm in the passive inhalation of vapour.

So at this point the case for e-cigarettes looks pretty strong. We know that smoking kills and that, without intervention, millions of smokers alive today will die of smoking-related illnesses. Despite being new to the market and lacking the long term research which can only come from an established product, e-cigarettes certainly seem significantly safer than their conventional cousins. Therefore, it is likely that making the switch from smoke to vapour is going to be pretty beneficial for your health.

This said, I don’t think we should be complacent with vaping and it certainly shouldn’t be marketed as ‘harmless’. It is important that legislations be formulated to standardise the mechanics of vaporisers and the content of e-liquids – particularly since studies have found products to vary widely in both their toxicity and nicotine delivery. Advertising must also be approached with caution. Critics of e-cigarettes have suggested that vaping may become a gateway for youngsters into smoking. Although there is currently no grounding to these fears, it is important that vaping is not glamorized in the media – it is not a harmless practice and should only be used by those already addicted to nicotine who want to improve their health by quitting smoking.

So, although we may have discovered smoke without fire there is no guarantee we won’t still get burned…

Post by: Sarah Fox

* Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) has estimated that currently about 1.3 million people in the UK use electronic cigarettes, and around 400,000 people have completely replaced smoking with electronic cigarettes (for link see here).

‘What are you looking at?’: The science of facial pareidolia

image1 copy 2As a child, much to my parents’ confusion, I had the uncanny ability to see faces in everyday patterns and objects. Yes, my circle of friends soon extended well beyond the confines of the playground, covering cloud formations, leaves, coffee stains and my personal favourite, a wise old man who stared knowingly down from a rip in my bedroom wallpaper. This peculiarity was put down to the fact that I was  an only child with a particularly overactive imagination. However, the ability has never left me and these illusionary faces often still pop up from time to time…although I now rarely try and engage them in conversation.

Therefore, I was quite interested to find that this phenomenon, known as facial pareidolia, is actually quite common. It is also the subject of a recent research paper entitled: ‘Seeing Jesus in Toast: Neural and behavioural correlates of face pareidolia’, which won its authors an Ig Nobel prize*. This paper explores how pareidolias (both facial and otherwise) can be used to understand the way our brains process information and how our sensory experiences often incorporate more than meets the eye.

We all know that our sensory experiences (vision, olfaction, touch etc) begin life in our sensory organs (eyes, nose, fingertips etc). Once a sensation is detected, this travels to the brain, where it is processed into a multi-sensory experience. However, we are not just passive sensors, like a camera. Instead our sensations are often coloured by internal processes, such as mood, expectation or attention. This ‘colouring’ is known as top-down modulation and can be a particularly personal experience (think of the Rorschach ‘inkblot’ test). Facial pareidolia is a good example of top-down modulation since: our sensory organs are simply experiencing a random pattern of input (such as a cloud formation or coffee stain), and something else causes us to give this input a more familiar or meaningful interpretation – in this case a face.

The study described in ‘Seeing Jesus in Toast’ investigated which brain regions were active when participants experienced pareidolia for either faces or letters. Specifically, brain activity was monitored while subjects viewed one of five different categories of images:

1) obvious faces (image: A)

2) hard-to-detect faces (image: B)

3) obvious letters (image: C)

4) hard-to-detect letters (image: D)

5) pure noise – no face or letter (image: E).

image2 copy 2

Participants were told that the images they were being shown could  contain either faces or letters and were asked to decide which pictures actually showed this hidden imagery. To ensure that all participants experienced pareidolia, the pesky researchers deliberately made sure that this task was really tricky.

What they discovered was that their subjects were a pretty suggestible bunch. Those who expected to see faces often spied a pair of eyes peering out at them from the pure noise stimuli, while those who were looking for letters often saw just that. .

From this work, the researchers were able to identify a network of crafty brain regions which seemed to be specifically responsible for tricking us into seeing illusory faces. They suggested that when we expect to see a face, regions of the brain responsible for decision making and facial recognition (such as the prefrontal cortex) shout commands down to regions that process more basic elements of images  ( in this case a region known as the right fusiform face area). Such a shout forces the ‘lower’ areas to incorrectly interpret a noisy image as containing a face. Put simply, if the brain is expecting to see a face it can alter the way we interpret visual information and make us see things which aren’t actually there.

drawingInterestingly, not all noisy images were incorrectly interpreted as showing faces. In fact, when the researchers took a closer look and compared noisy images which were mistaken for faces with those which were not, they found that these did actually contain patterns which looked a bit like faces. Take a good long squint at the image to the left (showing a noisy image mistaken for a face) and, at least to me, it’s easy to see two eyes a nose and an open mouth.

The researchers suggest that the system responsible for seeing faces popping out of highly ambiguous visual information may actually be adaptive. Specifically, they say “The tendency to detect faces in ambiguous visual information is perhaps highly adaptive given the supreme importance of faces in our social life and the high cost resulting from failure to detect a true face”. So, it appears that not only is seeing faces perfectly normal, but it may even be a socially adaptive trait. I guess that means I’m not really crazy and neither is this woman

Post by: Sarah Fox

* The Ig Nobel Prizes honor achievements that make people laugh, and then make them think and include a huge range of fascinating research. If you’ve not already heard of them I strongly recommend you have a browse through their website (here).

Save

The secret life of Robin Redbreast:

4476290531_fb6bcf3665_zWith the holiday season now in full swing, the unseasonable warmth leading up to Christmas 2014 got me thinking about what really make Christmas Christmas? For me the season just wouldn’t be complete without terrible television re-runs, twinkling Christmas lights, indulgent hot chocolate and a curious robin hopping expectantly round the garden as you bed it down for winter. Yes, as far back as I can remember these canny little birds have been as much a part of Christmas as the tree or the turkey. But, how much do we really know about our festive feathered friends and just how did they become such a mainstay of the holiday season? So as a late Christmas present, here is a collection of robin facts to get you a bit better acquainted with our friendly robin redbreast (Erithacus rubecula):

A red breasted mail carrier: Robins, with their bright red breasts, curious nature and friendly disposition have earned themselves the title of UK’s favourite bird. But, as a year round mainstay of the British garden, how did these birds also become one of the most iconic symbols of Christmas.

332693283_c6cc63805a_oIt is thought that the robin leant it’s name to mail carriers or postmen of the early to mid1800s. During this period postmen wore a distinctive scarlet uniform, earning them the nickname ‘redbreasts’. Around Christmas the ‘redbreast’ army was strong on the ground, spreading festive cheer and mailing our seasonal greetings; and, it wasn’t long before the postmen’s namesake the robin started making an appearance on the cards they were delivering (often depicted with letters in their beaks). This and the robins regular presence in the winter garden, has earned them a role in festive history.

Night singing: It seems that not only has the humble robin had a significant effect on our lives, but, in turn, we are also affecting theirs. Researchers have recently discovered that many urban birds, including the robin, have taken to singing at night – a pretty unusual behaviour for these diurnal creatures. But, what could cause these unusual nocturnal outbursts?

Two main theories predominate the scientific literature. The first theory being that artificial lights in major human settlements confuse the birds into mistaking night for day, messing up their circadian clock and leading to this noisy nighttime behaviour. While a second theory proposes that this ‘night singing’ is actually a coping strategy used by birds in response to their noisy urban homes – to ensure they sing at times when they are guaranteed to be heard above the din of the city. Indeed, a study carried out in Sheffield found that robins nesting in louder areas of the city were more likely to sing at night than their more rural cousins. Although the jury is still out on which theory will win, one thing which seems certain is that robins are adapting to life alongside us.

Territory and aggression: One fact few people know about our friend robin redbreast 6824704107_9c476b6585_zis that in reality this feisty little fellow is far from the picture of peace and serenity we see on Christmas cards. Indeed, scientists have found that robins are, in fact, fiercely territorial and have been known to violently attack other robins who stray into their territory – especially in the winter months when food is scarce! Indeed, the birds iconic red breast is not used, as you may suspect, to attract a mate, but is actually war paint. Like a red rag to a bull, the territorial robin has been known to attack anything red and feathery which happens to appear in its territory.

However, there are exceptions to this rule. This year I have been watching a pair of robins foraging in my garden and it appears that these birds are pretty comfortable with each others company. Perhaps it’s the relative abundance of food left over by the mild winter which has sparked the social flame between my birds. However it is also possible that these birds are a pair. Both female and male robins sport the same red breast so, to us, are almost indistinguishable. Pairs of birds have been known to share territory and cooperate over the winter months, so perhaps I have a festive love story infolding in my garden this winter.

1965357845_f72c2e1632_zHuman interaction: Although robins don’t always play nicely together, when it comes to their interactions with us they certainly know which side their bread is buttered. Anyone who has turned over soil in their garden is likely to have noticed these worm-loving birds hovering close by, waiting to collect the wriggly spoils of the newly turned soil. Some patient individuals have even been able to exploit the trusting and curious nature of robins, ultimately encouraging birds to eat directly out of their hands – something I’d certainly like to try.

So now we know a little bit more about our feathered Christmas companions and hopefully have a better understanding of this enigmatic and iconic garden visitor.

Post by: Sarah fox.

Nudge: how science is being used to influence our behaviour

Do you ever feel you are being influenced by things beyond your control? Well you’re not alone. In 2009 the UK government put together a special unit (the Behavioural Insights Team AKA the Nudge Unit), dedicated to using insights from behavioural economics and psychology to influence our behaviour.

Although the Nudge Unit may sound like something from a bleak dystopian future, where our every action is monitored and controlled, it’s best not to judge the idea too hastily. So, let’s take a minute to get acquainted with the ‘nudge’…

The idea behind the nudge stems from a simple fact about human behaviour: ‘no matter how smart a person is, many of the basic choices they make on a day-to-day basis will be purely impulsive with little or no logical basis‘. This may sound unusual, but if you think about it, it actually makes sense. Could you imagine how hard life would be if every mundane daily decision required deep contemplation? You’d probably never even make it out of bed in the morning!

Scientists believe that our brains accomplish tasks by relying on two different systems or modes of thinking. System-one is a bit of an air head; it’s fast, automatic and emotional. Whilst system-two is like your inner professor; slow, ruminating and logical. It’s no secret that when it comes to important decisions, system-two is your best bet. But, we don’t always have the time or resources to engage this system, meaning that many of our everyday mental decisions are actually made ‘on the fly’ by system-one. To test this hypothesis, try answering the following question:

Baseball bat

A bat and ball cost £1.10. The bat costs £1 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?

Can you hear system-one shouting out the answer ’10p’? This answer may instinctively feel correct, but with a bit of extra thought it’s easy to come to the correct answer of ‘5p’. For more examples of the system-one/system-two divide see the video below:

 

Yes, poor impulsive system-one has many flaws. It is heavily swayed by social pressure, easily tricked, and has a tendency to favour short-term pleasure over long-term success; and with these flaws comes a certain level of predictability. It is this predictability that is now being utilised by the government’s Nudge unit to influence our behaviour.

In the 2008 book Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness, behavioural scientists from the University of Chicago laid out guidelines on how to apply behavioural nudges to policy. Now, six years on, concepts from this work are being used across the world to influence everything from tax fraud to antisocial bathroom habits.

Here are a couple of examples:

Schiphol flies:

AuthoFly urinalrities at Schiphol airport in Amsterdam were at a loss over excessive cleaning bills in their male toilets – where patrons seemed to hit everything but the urinal. However, economist Aad Kieboom had a solution. Rather than posting signs in the room asking patrons to improve their aim, he suggested that airport authorities etched a small picture of a fly into each urinal. This unusual solution worked by giving men something to aim at and reportedly reduced the airport’s lavatory cleaning bill by 80%. This is also arguably the most celebrated example of a nudge (a strategy for changing human behaviour based on an understanding of what real people are like).

Manchester tax dodgers:

In a recent document the UK’s Nudge unit discuss how the application of behavioural insights can be used to reduce fraud, error and debt. Indeed, even our own fair city has begun to participate in nudge politics. In 2011, Manchester residents claiming single person discount on their council tax were randomly sent one of three different letters, asking them to fill out a form to renew their claim. The first form was a standard document commonly used by the council, the other two however used nudges in an attempt to encourage honesty. These nudges were pretty simple, including simplified language, clear messages and a reminder that providing false information is an act of fraud. Amazingly, the study suggests that simply re-wording these forms did indeed lead to a reduction in the number of fraudulent claims.

So, our impulsive system-one certainly seems susceptible to the odd nudge, but many questions still remain. For example, which nudges work best? – Has anyone spotted the motorway signs stating ‘Bin your litter, other people do’? This sign was based on the theory that people are more likely to comply if they think that complying is a social norm. Personally, I find this particular nudge a bit condescending. OK, so I’m yet to throw litter out may car window just to make a point, but I also don’t feel compelled to comply. Also, when does a nudge become a shove and who decides the best direction to nudge people in? These are all important questions that need some serious thought. But, overall I think that the nudge is certainly an interesting concept and one that could offer more insights into human behaviour.

What are your views? Has anyone spotted any more hidden nudges? Add your comment below, other people do!


Post by: Sarah Fox

The best laid plans o’mice and researchers: my top 5 chance scientific discoveries.

Most scientists are rarely content until they can say that they have planned for all eventualities. But no matter how hard you try, lab work will often throw you a curve ball, turning up all manner of unexpected curiosities. Yes, it’s true the “best laid plans o’mice and researchers gang aft a gley”*! However, there is no need to despair, for buried in the annals of scientific literature are a number of compelling tales where odd results and downright stupidity have actually lead to some pretty ground-breaking discoveries. So, here are five of my favorite examples of scientific serendipity.

5) The artificial pacemaker:

The first implantable pacemaker
The first implantable pacemaker

The first implantable pacemaker was invented and developed by electrical engineer and prolific inventor Wilson Greatbatch. But this is no ordinary tale of academic prowess. Unfortunate and clumsy scientists can take heart to learn that, despite Greatbatch’s impressive academic repertoire, it was actually a technical mistake which lead him towards this life-saving invention.

In 1956, Greatbatch was working on a device to record heart-rhythms when he accidentally connected an incorrect electrical component (for the geeky this was an ill-fitting resistor). This mistake meant that his device actually emitted electrical activity instead of recording it.  Greatbatch worked on miniaturising and testing his creation and by 1960 the first artificial pacemaker was implanted into a human patient. The recipient, a 77  year old man  went on to live for a further 18 months.

This is a great example of when a technical error actually translated into a ground-breaking discovery. But be careful, 99% of the time such mistakes are still significantly more likely to end in blown fuses and angry screaming than medical breakthroughs!

4) The discovery of penicillin.

Alexander Fleming
Alexander Fleming

No list of accidental scientific discoveries could be complete without the tale of Alexander Fleming’s discovery of penicillin. Fleming, who at the time was described as a careless lab technician (charming), returned from holiday to find that one of his badly tended experiments had grown mould. Although in this instance, his inability to maintain a sterile work environment actually revolutionised modern medicine.

Fleming noticed that the Staphylococcus bacteria  in this particular sample did not grow around the mould. Indeed he noted that the Staphylococcus colonies became transparent and were obviously dying.  The mould was soon identified as a rare strain of Penicillium notatum, which appeared to secrete a compound capable of stopping bacterial growth. In fact Fleming’s mucky lab practices had lead him to stumble upon the first known antibiotic – a discovery which has since changed the course of medicine and allowed for previously life-threatening diseases to be completely curable.

Fleming himself is quoted as saying: “One sometimes finds what one is not looking for. When I woke up just after dawn on Sept. 28, 1928, I certainly didn’t plan to revolutionize all medicine by discovering the world’s first antibiotic, or bacteria killer. But I guess that was exactly what I did” (he was obviously a humble chap).

3) Cosmic background radiation.

IMGP0003Any scientist can tell you how annoying inconsistent or noisy data can be, but not many could boast that noise actually won them a Nobel Prize.

In 1965, Arno A. Penzias and Robert W. Wilson were working for Bell Laboratories using a sensitive horn antenna to detect low levels of microwave radiation. As they scanned the sky with this device their findings were constantly overshadowed by a low level of background “noise”. Both scientists assumed that this persistent “noise” was an unwanted artifact and tried a huge range of techniques to eliminate it but their attempts were to no avail. However, after much head-scratching they finally discovered that another group of scientists from Princeton had already predicted that such “noise” should be detectable as a remnant from the Big Bang and were about to start looking for this themselves.

So it turned out that the annoying artifact that Penzias and Wilson spent so much time trying to eliminate was actually background radiation left over from the Big BangIf only experimental noise was always this interesting!

2) Drunk scientists discover wine improves super conductance

A wine label only a scientist could love!Contrary to the popular mathematician’s saying ‘don’t drink and derive’, it seems that, in some cases, a little bit of alcohol (or perhaps a lot) can actually facilitate scientific discovery.

A few years ago, scientists at Japan’s National Institute for Materials Science got a little bit tipsy at an office party and, instead of stealing office supplies, they decided to head back to the lab and do a few unauthorised experiments.

Their lab was working to develop a new type of superconductor by soaking a compound in hot water and ethanol for several hours. But, after a few drinks, one bright spark decided that it would be much more fun to see what happened when they instead soaked this compound in whatever left-over booze they could find from the party.

Amazingly the next morning, alongside the customary hangover, the researchers also discovered that commercially available alcohol seemed significantly better at improving super conductance than anything they would commonly use in the lab. Indeed, using lab- grade ethanol improved the material’s superconductivity by about 15%, while red wine improved it by almost 65%. These results were certainly not expected but were, without doubt, a big step forward for these scientists – I think it may be time for another party!

1) Common worming tablet inhibits growth of cancer cells.

3667927147_e452ddc04eScientists from Johns Hopkins University’s East Baltimore medical campus were left scratching their heads a few years ago when techniques used to grow tumors in mice failed to work on one particular group of research animals. After a number of failed attempts, the researchers decided that there was something kooky about these mice and set about finding what it was.

It turned out that these specific mice had been treated with a cheap, mass-produced, medication used to prevent pinworm infections and that this had been preventing tumor growth in these animals. Spurred on by this unexpected breakthrough, researchers soon found that a related drug – mebendazole – was particularly effective at treating an aggressive type of brain tumor (glioblastoma multiforme).

Years down the line and new drugs, stemming from this unexpected discovery, are now being trialed on terminally ill cancer patients with the hope that this will lead to more widespread use.

So there you have it. If you want to be a top-notch scientist remember that keeping your workspace sterile is totally overrated, regular office parties are a must and don’t forget to love your noise – you never know where it may lead you.

Post by: Sarah Fox
*Often go awry.

The science behind Game of Thrones:

Spoiler alert: This article refers to events up to Season 4 Episode 2 of Game of Thrones. Please do not continue reading unless you have watched up to this point! Please do not include book spoilers in the comments section.

After taking time to pick my jaw up off the floor in the wake of GOT’s Purple Wedding, this week I’ve decided to indulge my inner geek and take a look at some of the amazing real-world science which courses through the fictional land of Westeros. So sit back, relax and wonder at resurrecting reptiles, ancient beasts, amazing brain imaging and the real-world poisons that finally wiped the smirk of King Joffrey’s face.

Dragons in stasis:

Who can forget the iconic moment when Daenerys (Dany) Targaryen (mother of dragons) emerged from the flames, unscathed and cradling a small brood of adorable baby dragons. Although I can’t vouch for the scientific realism behind Dany’s apparently flame retardant skin; it seems that George R. R. Martin may have borrowed the idea of embryonic resurrection from real-life reptiles.

DanyA number of reptiles, including turtles and chameleons, show an adaptation known as arrested embryonic development. This adaptation means that developing reptiles can remain arrested (paused) at an early stage of development, safely locked away inside their protective egg shell until environmental conditions are favourable for them to break free and explore the world. Apparently, in the case of dragons, this tends to be during periods of prolonged and intense heat. Interestingly, this form of arrested development is more common in species that lay thicker-shelled more rigid eggs – like dragons perhaps?

However, this theory falls short if you consider the apparent age of Dany’s dragon eggs – these being around 150 years old. Real life reptile eggs expressing arrested development, also known as diapause, tend to only remain dormant for a maximum period of a year – any longer and the embryo is likely to die. This is a fair way off the 150 year mark, however, if we throw invertebrates into the mix, we find reports of life emerging from eggs which have laid dormant on a museum shelf for over 120 years (specifically Tardigrade or waterbear eggs)! So, scientifically speaking, it seems Dany’s dragons are a hybrid between modern day reptiles and invertebrates with the ability to remain dormant for many years; a terrifying mesh of science fiction and science fact which will hopefully soon burn a path directly to the Iron Throne for our bad-ass dragon queen!

Dire wolves:

With wild burning eyes and powerful bone-breaking jaws the dire wolf, sigil of the ill-fated house Stark, is not only a formidable creature, but also one which does not stem purely from science-fiction. Indeed, dire wolves, also known as Canis dirus (meaning fearsome dog) are known to have roamed the Earth along with other megafauna such as giant sloths, woolly mammoths and giant beavers over 10,000 years ago.

Dire_Wolf_SkeletonThe average dire wolf would have been roughly the same size as a grey wolf; averaging about 1.5m (4.9ft) in length, but with a significantly heavier build, weighing between 50kg (110lb) and 79kg (174lb) – making them the largest species in the genus Canis. Their teeth were also relatively large leading palaeontologists to suggest that these were used to crush bone. The animals were once common throughout North and South America; indeed, dozens of dire wolf fossils have been recovered from the La Brea Tar Pits in Los Angeles.

Was Khal Drogo really brain dead?:

khal_drogo_by_sanxtv-d5nxjp1Whether Dany’s feelings for Khal Drogo stemmed from true love or Stockholm syndrome, I couldn’t help but feel sad when this unexpected love story drew to an abrupt and tragic end. The enigmatic powers of blood magic appeared to leave poor Drogo in a vegetative state, but what was really going on behind his inscrutable gaze?

Modern imaging science is now revolutionising our understanding of vegetative states and is providing a window into the minds of otherwise unresponsive patients. A vegetative state is defined as when a patient is awake, but shows no signs of conscious awareness. Due to the unresponsive nature of most vegetative patients, you may be forgiven in assuming that they are actually brain dead and incapable of responding. However, recent ground-breaking work using fMRI has revealed that, in some cases, vegetative patents have an intact conscious mind and, by controlling their brain activity, can clearly provide yes or no answers to simple questions. This can be seen in the astounding video footage below where a Canadian man (Scott Routley) who, for over a decade, was believed to be in an unresponsive ‘vegetative’ state is able to ‘talk’ to scientists through an fMRI and to indicate that he is not in any pain.

Perhaps if Vaes Dothrak had state of the art fMRI equipment this little love story may have had a happier ending?

What killed Joffrey?:

joffrey_baratheon_by_slashaline-d79pz1sOK, so I think we can all agree that no one was particularly upset by the death of this smug teenage tyrant with more power than sense. But, following the particularly graphic and gruesome portrayal of Joff’s final moments, I question; was this death purely a work of fiction or is such an end possible with the use of real-world poisons?

To answer this question we must first consider Joff’s dying minutes:

Joff’s final moments followed from a sip of wine and a bite of pie; either of which could have been the vessel for this deadly dram. The first observable symptoms of this poisoning, manifest as a dryness in his mouth, followed by an intense coughing fit.

Gasping for breath he soon falls to the floor and vomits. Unable to stand, he lays fighting for breath and convulsing. Cersei rushes to help her son, turning him over and, in the process, revealing a grey/blue pallor to his face and lines of fresh blood coursing from his nostrils. After a final plaintive glance towards his mother (which almost convinces us he may actually be human), he rapidly dies in her arms.

From these symptoms we could conclude that whatever poison was used must have the following properties:

1) It must be fast acting.

2) It must cause respiratory distress, perhaps through pulmonary oedema (a build-up of fluid in the lungs).

3) It must cause haemorrhage, perhaps by thinning the blood, or preventing clotting.

Although there are no real-world poisons which can create this exact collection of symptoms alone, a number may induce similar effects and, in combination, may replicate George R. R. Martin’s fictional strangler.

One substance which fulfils both criteria 1 and 2 is cyanide. It only takes a small amount of cyanide to produce a toxic effect and the poison is quickly adsorbed into the body through the gut. This poison causes a burning sensation in the throat and also leads to pulmonary oedema which, more often than not, can trigger violent coughing fits. Cyanide poisoning also fits well with the observation of vomiting and a bluing of the skin. Since cyanide interferes with the body’s ability to generate energy in its cells, these cells begin to die and, as death nears, the affected person’s skin can turn blue – a clinical effect called cyanosis.

Another possible candidate toxin is Deadly nightshade. This potent poison disrupts nerve cell communication, causing convulsions, dry mouth, a sense of choking and dilation of blood vessels – turning the victims face red. However, neither cyanide or Deadly nightshade commonly lead to haemorrhaging.

Haemorrhaging may be caused by agents which prevent clotting and thin the blood, a well known example being warfarin, found in pesticides. However, the effects of warfarin are commonly not seen until several days after ingestion, meaning that this poison is too slow to be our candidate. A number of snake venoms also thin the blood, meaning that perhaps the poison used to kill Joffrey was a mixture of more than one toxin.

It is, however, also possible that the haemorrhaging seen at the purple wedding was simply caused by the violent coughing fit Joff experienced before his death.

So, the most likely candidate poison seems to be cyanide, perhaps mixed with a blood thinning venom. But, whatever the cause of death, the biggest question still remains…who put it there? With such a renowned and despised groom, anyone could be a suspect; sadly though, this is one question science can’t answer…I guess we’ll just have to wait and see!

Note: for a more in-depth discussion of Joff’s poisoning see this great article by Rachel Nuwer.

So there we have it. The fictional world of Westeros is actually awash with scientific fact. Be it ancient wolves or reptilian resurrection, science can give us valuable insights into the dramatic events of Game of Thrones. It probably cannot explain why someone might kill a whole family at a wedding though…

Post by: Sarah Fox

Night Nurse: The problem of night-time noise in hospitals

hospitalPicture the scene: It’s been a long day, you’ve been violently ill and feel like every ounce of strength has been drained from your body. Finally, after being poked and prodded, interrogated and tested, you find yourself in a warm bed with a soft pillow behind your head. Drained and slightly disoriented, you manage to overcome the nagging nausea and discomfort and eventually your eyelids grow heavy and the days trials begin to wash away as you drift into a gentle sleep… AAARRGGHH, you’re suddenly jolted awake as a distressed cry pierces the air. Confused and groggy you turn to see an elderly woman moaning and sobbing in a bed to your left, alarm bells ring and soon a young nurse is by her side cooing gently and diffusing her confused rage. Flustered, you turn your head away and close your eyes, trying to blank out the unfolding scene. You must have fallen asleep again, since the next time you awake the drama is over, but now you notice a small frail woman standing at the foot of you bed tugging your sheet. “Excuse me” she mutters politely, “I don’t know where I am and I need to get home, can you help?”. After trying in earnest to console her, you drag yourself out of bed and fetch a nurse to help settle her back into bed. Soon after this you are awoken a third time, now by a pair of nurses loudly chatting a few meters from your bed. Exasperated, you notice that their conversation isn’t even about their patients and instead centres around some dodgy sounding shenanigans that occurred on a staff ‘night out’.

Unfortunately this story is not fictional, this is an actual account of a night I recently spent in hospital whilst receiving treatment for a kidney infection. Further to this, I don’t believe my experience was isolated. Over the past two years I have been unfortunate enough to experience both first and second hand the nocturnal practices of four separate NHS hospitals. One, as described above, was my own personal experience, while the remaining three have been accounted to me by both my late grandma and my fiancé’s nan. Each account has shared a common thread specifically, sleep deprivation blamed on excessive night time noise – usually from both fellow patients and staff.

loudThe World Health Organisation recommends that hospital patients are not exposed to noise over 35-40 decibels, the equivalent of a loud whisper. However, a range of studies have found that noise levels in hospital wards often significantly exceed 60 decibels, even during the night (60 decibels being equivalent to a regular conversation). Noise levels in this range are expected to cause sleep disturbances and have been highlighted in patient surveys as being responsible for increased stress and lack of sleep.

Sleep is an essential biological function and lack of it has been associated with a range of adverse outcomes including; altered immune function, metabolic dysfunctions and psychological disturbances including depression, stress and anxiety. Although most studies of sleep disruption are performed on healthy volunteers, it makes sense that those recovering from illness will also benefit from a good night’s sleep; a fact which was recognised over 100 years ago by Florence Nightingale in her ‘Notes on Nursing’, where she writes: “Unnecessary noise then is the most cruel absence of care, which can be inflicted either on sick or well…. A nurse who rustles (I am speaking of nurses professional and unprofessional) is the horror of a patient, though perhaps he does not know why. The fidget of silk and of crinoline, the rattling of keys and of shoes, will do a patient more harm than all the medicines in the world will do him good.”

Noise levels undoubtedly affects some patents to a greater extent than others and studies are yet to conclusively link hospital noise levels with sleep disturbances or negative patient outcomes. However, it has been suggested that disrupted sleep can cause additional stress to acutely ill or injured patients and may potentially impede successful recovery. Anecdotally, I often wonder whether the hospital environment played a significant role in my grandma’s passing. She was a kind, quiet woman who loved her own home comforts. I still remember the distress in her voice when she explained to me how she couldn’t sleep because her fellow patients and the nursing staff were always so loud, even at night. She was a sensitive soul and it was painfully obvious that the hospital environment caused her distress. The cause of her passing was officially registered as ‘frailty of age’. However, I wonder whether the degeneration of her condition and her ultimate decision to refuse food was linked to distress caused by her surroundings, and whether things would have been different had she been cared for at home?

bedI have no doubt that nurses and doctors perform the best job they are capable of, given the structures in which they are expected to work. However, I also think it’s time that hospitals dedicate more time and resources to optimising patient comfort and ensuring that they achieve adequate recovery sleep while under hospital care. Ironically, much of the noise present in the hospital environment is created by measures put in place to improve patient health and safety. This includes: loud machinery, a high density of staff working to care for patients and uncarpeted floors, which reduce the risk of infection but can be loud underfoot or under the wheels of rolling equipment. Noise sources such as these must be assessed and noise reduction measures brought into place. Indeed, some hospitals are already addressing these issues by training staff about noise reduction and by providing patients with ear plugs and eye masks (to reduce the effect of continuous light in hospital wards). It is promising to note that such interventions, alongside structural alterations designed to reduce noise, appear to have a positive effect on reported patient satisfaction and recorded levels of noise on hospital wards. Therefore, I believe that practical noise reduction measures are a must for the future of all public hospitals. A good review of hospital noise and practical solution to these problems can be found here.

Note: I have no intention of revealing the names of hospitals mentioned in this report since, I believe this is a wide-spread problem involving hospital structure and not specifically the fault of any individual establishment.

Post by: Sarah Fox