Showing posts with label research. Show all posts
Showing posts with label research. Show all posts

Tuesday 15 October 2024

Research confirms a link between social media use and anxiety among teenagers


Research has confirmed the link between social media use and anxiety among teenagers. More work is ongoing. Experts at Oxford University are beginning a 10 year study into teenage mental health. It's called BrainWaves. Their initial research suggests that the more time youngsters spend on social media the more likely they are to suffer from anxiety and depression.

Currently, the study has involved information collected from 7,200 students in the UK. The study's objective is to find good evidence about this much-discuss link. There has been a lot of discussion both by politicians in the UK and I believe elsewhere about the detrimental effects of being addicted to smart phones through which social media is constantly accessed.

There was a recent report in The Time yesterday which provided evidence that the administrators of TikTok know that their platform is addictive and they desire it to be addictive. This is the objective. They deliberately target young people and hook them in. They present to the world a different picture. A picture in which they state that they are doing their best to make it less addictive but behind the scenes, in truth, they are doing the opposite it appears to me.

Some schools in the UK are banning smart phones from the school grounds in the interests of students' health and welfare and I presume to make them more productive while they attend classes.

It has been found that some teenagers spend eight hours a day on their smart phones bouncing around social media posts.

Some of the data is astonishing. NHS information shows that more than 1 million children and teenagers under 18 are in contact with NHS mental health services. Girls are more likely than boys to have problems. One in five girls aged 16 are in contact with NHS mental health services and these problems have increased significantly over the past five years.

This study by a team at Oxford and I understand Swansea University and The Day newspaper will conduct research involving 50,000 adolescents. The objective is to build evidence on a link between social media use and mental health.

The study is being led by John Gallacher, a professor of cognitive health and Oxford. He told the Financial Times that initial results "found a linear relationship between higher rates of anxiety and depression and time spent networking on social media sites. In the most extreme cases, we have young people reporting they were spending up to 8 hours a day using these sites."

In the UK, a private members bill will be introduced tomorrow in the House of Commons to tackle addictive phone use in children.. The bill proposes a legal requirement that schools are phone-free.

It is called the Safer Phones Bill. It has cross-party support. It's being tabled by Labour MP Josh McAlister. He said: "The evidence is mounting that children doom-scrolling for hours a day is causing widespread harm. We need the equivalent of the "seatbelt" legislation for social media use for children. Adults find it hard enough to manage screen time, so why are we expecting children to manage this addictive content without some shared rules?"

In Australia, last month, plans were announced for a social media ban for under 16's. In the UK, charities are calling for the UK to follow suit.

Anne Longfield founder of the Centre for Young Lives (a think tank) said: "This bill opens the door to a crucial national debate about the negative impact smart phones can have on children, and the urgent need to address those problems. Parliament now has an opportunity to reset children's relationship with smart phones, and marginalise their impact and influence on developing young minds."

------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also, sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.

Wednesday 4 September 2024

Gifted word-learning dogs can remember the names of their toys for years

This is a study which confirms perhaps what some lucky people might already know namely that gifted dogs can remember the names of their favourite toys for two years or more and therefore have excellent memories.

And almost all dogs can learn words linked to actions as we also know because they are very trainable. They understand words such as "sit" and "down". But only a small group of gifted dogs described as "gifted word-learners" can learn a wide range of words associated with particular objects.


The research was carried out at Eotvos University. In this study, the researchers challenge the owners of six border college to teach their pets the names of 12 new toys within seven days. The study showed that the dogs were able to learn the names and retrieve the correct toy when requested to do so.

Once the tests had been completed the owners were asked to hide the toys and store them out of sight. They then waited two years to see whether the dogs could remember them.

"We waited two years and then decided to test the dogs again to see if they still remember the toy names."

There was no rehearsal as I understand it. One of the six dogs had died so the remaining five were tested. And in some instances some toys had been lost so in all three dogs were tested in respect of 12 toys with one tested on 11 toys and one dog on five toys.
"After two years, we had a hard time remembering the names of the toys but just the dogs. They did not seem to struggle."
Four dogs remember the names of between 60% and 75% of the toys. They confirmed this by naming the toy in the spoken word followed by the dogs picking up the correct toy out of a line-up of toys. They did this correctly on 44% of attempts.

This was "significantly above chance level". The report is that a dog faced with 12 toys "would be expected to get it right 8.3% of the time if it was simply guessing, while a dog faced with five toys would get it right 20% of the time based on chance alone". That quote comes from the Times newspaper of September 4, 2024.

The study is published in the journal Biology Letters.

It said that "When comparing the dogs' group performance in the present two-year memory test with that of the one and two-month memory test, it appears there was no significant reduction in their recall of the labelled objects."

The head of the research group, Dr. Claudia Fugazza, said: 
"We know that dogs can remember events for at least 24 hours and odours for up to one year, but this is the first study showing that some talented dogs can remember words for at least two years."
She added that: 
"The findings are our current study cannot be generalised to other dogs because we only tested gifted word-than dogs i.e. individuals that show a special talent for acquiring object words." 
Border collies were found to be the most gifted breed when it comes to vocabulary and the naming of objects. German shepherds, Pekinese and the mini Australian shepherd dogs may have the same talents.

There was a global search for gifted dogs to conduct the test apparently. They were all found to know more than 28 toys by name with some being able to recognise more than 100 toys, remarkably.

----------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also: sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. Also, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable.

Saturday 17 February 2024

AI-generated scientific paper illustration of a rat with a giant erect penis shocks the scientific community

This is a warning about the dangers of AI-generated images and documents. It concerns a research paper published by a leading scientific journal online about the "signalling pathway of sperm stem cells" which was illustrated with a picture of a rat with a giant erect penis and four giant testicles with gobbledygook labelling.

Was this a deliberate plan by the people who submitted the research report to undermine the scientific journals online with the intention to shed light on the lack of oversight by these journals?

AI-generated scientific paper illustration of a rat with a giant erect penis shocks the scientific community. The words of the labelling is rubbish. The words are made-up. Image: The Telegraph.

This AI cock up of a scientific paper created by an artificial intelligence computer got past the journal's peer reviewers and other checks that they are meant to be running and ended up being published. It's been ridiculed of course and it's become a news media story of interest because it provides us with a warning about the potential deficiencies of artificial intelligence.

It also tells us about how artificial intelligence can deceive people because sometimes these images are very good despite being fake. You end up not being sure what is real and what is unreal which in the hands of unscrupulous people can be dangerous.

The research paper was supposedly written by researchers at the Honghui Hospital in China. It's been removed from the journal and the administrators have issued an apology and confirmed that they are working to "correct the record".

Scientists have expressed their concern as to how it was published in the first place. Adrian Liston, Professor of pathology at Cambridge University and editor of the journal Immunology and Cell Biology said: "Generative AI is very good at making up things that sound like they come from a human being. It doesn't check whether those things are correct."

The research paper has been likened to an actor pretending to be a doctor and then delivering medical advice to a patient. Other scientists have described the illustrations as 'shameful' and 'devastating' while some said that they weren't sure "whether to laugh or cry".

The illustrations have been described as "objectively funny" but "[they] have no place in science journals."

The story is a warning to anybody researching online. What is troubling for me is that this fakery has occurred on a science journal. Science is meant to be objective and accurate. It's meant to be as precise and truthful as best as it can be. 

And therefore this AI-generated craziness has infiltrated a bastion of science. You might expect it to occur in less precise and scientific environments but it hasn't and this is troublesome.

----------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Thursday 18 January 2024

Middle-aged women can be happier if they eat more plant-based protein!

When you become older and when you are old, health is vitally important in achieving your objective of being as happy as possible (our ultimate objective). Ill-health makes you miserable. Being healthy helps to make you happier. The two are inextricably linked. 💚

Also linked to being healthy is your diet. A good healthy diet will therefore make you happier. Yes, I realise it is a bit boring thinking about plant-based proteins BUT...there are bigtime advantages. By far the most important thing in the lives of our more elderly citizens is their HEALTH 😆. Nothing compares.


And there is some brand-new research on the Internet right now concerning middle-aged women. I'm concerned about the health of middle-aged women because lots of them live with cats and I want them to be healthy so that they can look after their cats in a really excellent way, which, by the way, begs the question as to whether domestic cats can also eat food based on plant protein. 


There's a product on the market right now which permits that. You might investigate it. I did but my cat didn't like it! But I think a plant-based food for cats might be advantageous in terms of feline health which sounds strange but research it and be open to a change of mind.


To return to middle-aged women which is the subject of this article. The Times reports in a snippet of news today that "middle-aged women should eat more plant-based protein to boost long-term health."

The article is based on research published on January 17, 2014 coming from Jean Mayer Human Nutrition Research Centre on Ageing at Tufts University in Massachusetts.

The study of 48,000 women found less heart disease, less cancer, less diabetes and less cognitive decline and mental health issues for those who ate more plant protein.

The researchers believe that it isn't the actual protein it makes a difference but the plant diet itself. They looked at the health of women from 1984 to 2016 and compared their diets with their health today.

The lead author of the study, Andres Ardisson Korat, said that:
"Consuming protein in midlife was linked to promoting good health in older adults at. We also found that the source of protein matters. Getting the majority of your protein from plant sources at midlife, plus a small amount of animal protein seems to be conductive to good health and good survival to older ages."
He added:
“Dietary protein intake, especially plant protein, in midlife plays an important role in the promotion of healthy aging and in maintaining positive health status at older ages,” Ardisson Korat said.
So, ladies, give it a try please. Start when you are young and you'll almost certainly be happier when you are old. And you'll probably be slimmer too. Maintaining a good BMI is very important to general health and happiness. I know it is hard but the benefits outweigh the downsides.

------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Thursday 11 August 2022

Small dogs beat cats when looking for love

I am afraid that this is something that domestic cats can't really do very well or hardly at all: walk on a lead with a man! How often do you see that? Almost zero is the answer but research from the University of Jaen in Spain indicates that men who are unlucky in love might have a solution in the shape of a pint-sized pooch.

Orlando Bloom looks safe to women! Photo: WireImage. On July 16th 2020 it was reported that he was heartbroken about the loss of his dog.

Scientists in Spain found in a study involving 300 women that when they looked at men with small dogs, they were perceived as being less intimidating and threatening. The women said that they felt "more in control, safer, and calmer" when around men with small dogs. It appears that big dogs don't do the same thing which is unsurprising seeing as the kind of men who like big dogs are probably quite big (or aggressive?) themselves and, in any case, big dogs are intimidating.

The female participants in this study were showed a range of photographs of men and women on their own or with a small dachshund dog or a medium-sized Portuguese podengo-like mixed breed dog.

They were shown two types of photograph. In one, the context was positive i.e. a well-lit urban space in the daytime. In the other the context was negative being a dimly lit quiet street at night. The participants were asked to imagine they were alone and that the person was walking towards them.

When those people who were walking towards them were accompanied by a dog, either small or medium-sized, the participants responded more positively than when they were alone.

The researchers said that:

"The small dog prompts more positive emotional reactivity and higher levels of safety than the medium-sized dogs in most emotional contexts, pointing out that emotional and safety benefits from dog presence might also be related to size."

One of the study authors, Raphael Delgado, suggested that the presence of a dog would indicate that a man was nurturing and capable of caregiving which made them less threatening in the eyes of the female participants.

He also said that a dog's presence "promotes a sense of safety". And even in intimidating and frightening settings such as a dimly lit street the presence of a dog had a soothing effect.

Sadly, this is where dogs outdo cats. As I recall, when women see men with cats, they think they are gay or weak. Perhaps I have exaggerated but it is something like that.

Hannah Betts of The Times writes amusingly about her boyfriend's experiences when walking with their whippet. She says that their whippet increased her boyfriend's allure from their very first outing. She said:

"As she danced around the park like a tiny gray form, women of all ages charged from every corner, shouldering me out of the way to pay homage to man and pup. Later, when she became tired, Terence had to carry her up the Kings Road tucked into his Barbour. Cue a conga line of fainting Sloanes."

Clearly, for Hannah Betts's boyfriend, Terence, the small dog works wonders if a man is looking for love.

Sunday 18 July 2021

Millions of UNUSED research animals killed in Germany including cats

A report which was discussed in April 2020 in the news media revealed a shocking statistic namely that in Germany 3.9 million animals died at research laboratories and these animals had never been used in research. I'll restate that because it is so shocking. Animals brought into research laboratories or bred there and which were not subsequently employed in the research were killed nonetheless and the number of these animals stands at 3.9 million. The figure relates to 2017 in Germany.

Animals not used but killed in Animal research in Germany amounted to 3.9 million in 2017
Animals not used but killed in Animal research in Germany amounted to 3.9 million in 2017. Photo: Image by Tibor Janosi Mozes from Pixabay.



The information was released after the Green party requested the information. Perhaps more shockingly, across the entire European Union 12.6 million animals were killed under the same circumstances. I find that number hard to digest. Is it really true? It is saying that almost 13 million animals were killed for no reason! No reason whatsoever. This is mass animal cruelty but entirely legalised.

Initially the government of Chancellor Angela Merkel tried to sugarcoat the statistics by releasing the number of animals killed after they were experimented on. That number is high enough at 2.8 million in Germany in 2017. Apparently 2017 saw the highest number of animals ever bred for research in Germany. They included 718 cats, monkeys, fish and over a quarter of a million rats.

About 50% are used for basic research experiments, 27% used in testing for new medicines, while 15% were tested in respect of specific diseases. Across Europe animal experiments are banned to research cosmetics. The same applies to the UK.

Comment: there are many instances when animals that have been tested on for scientific purposes are still viable as domestic pets but they are invariably killed. But, in the EU, when they are not even used, abused, exploited and injured by scientific researchers they are still killed and thrown away. You just can't fathom it can you?

The German Animal Welfare Act allows the use of animals in research despite the fact that the law provides extensive and far-reaching protection. Interestingly, animals under the law in Germany are regarded as "fellow creatures". Hardly true. In order to justify experiments on animals in Germany the researchers must always show that the goal of the experiments cannot be reached using any other methods or techniques. Specifically, experiments can only be carried out if at least one of the following criteria is fulfilled:

  • The experiments serve the purpose of prevention, diagnosis or treatment of diseases in humans and animals;
  • They help recognize environmental hazards;
  • They are part of safety testing for materials or products;
  • They are necessary for basic research.

Note: I've taken those words verbatim from the Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics webpage in the interests of complete accuracy.

Friday 16 July 2021

Increasing the life of cats from 15 to 30 years - a cure for feline kidney disease

Professor Miyazaki believes that he might be able to double the expected lifespan of domestic cats to 30 years using a treatment he is working on.

Toru Miyazaki, 59, professor at the Graduate School of Medicine of the University of Tokyo
Toru Miyazaki, 59, professor at the Graduate School of Medicine of the University of Tokyo. Picture: the University.

His extensive research found a new protein in the blood of humans and animals. He calls it AIM which stands for "apoptosis inhibitor of macrophage". Yes, I know that doesn't help!

He says that feline kidney disease is caused by dead cells piling up in the urinary tract which blocks the passageway like a clogged drain. This leads to kidney damage.

He says that AIM acts as an agent to unclog the pipes. AIM "goes to the problem area through the blood and flags exactly where the waste is. AIM itself does not dissolve the problem cells; rather other cells like macrophages come along to eat them". Macrophages are cells which destroy harmful organisms. They are also described as a "type of white blood cell that eats and digests foreign material inside the body."

He wants to administer AIM to cats via a vaccine as a preventative medicine and perhaps in other ways (orally or in a capsule?). He's started clinical trials in 2020 (reported). He wants the treatment to become a commodity i.e. a useable product by 2022.

My cat died on CKD. Photo: MikeB

He's excited by the possibility of AIM extending the lives of cats dramatically. He's correct in saying that feline kidney disease is a mass killer, shortening the lives of domestic cats in huge numbers.

His work is reactive essentially. I hope that he is successful but what about researching the reason why feline kidney disease is so disastrously prevalent in the domestic cat population? Is it the food? It might be. Why do domestic cats die of kidney far more often than humans? We need to address that question with more vigour.

No one comes up with a satisfactory answer as to why domestic cats are so predisposed to kidney disease. The situation indicates an underlying but as yet unknown environmental reason. My best bet is the commercial foods that we feed them. It might be the dry foods which have gained in popularity tremendously over the past decades.

CKD affects 8+ percent of cats of 10 years old and older. One well-known vet, Dr Elizabeth Hodgkins believes that dry cat foods are the culprit and feeding high quality wet foods can help dramatically plus a powdered phosphorus binder. One cat, Georgia, did very well on "fluids, a phosphate binder and a commercial high-protein diet. Read her book Your Cat to find out more.

Cat owners should also wish the best of luck to the professor in his quest to increase the life of domestic cats from 15 to 30 years.

Thursday 18 June 2015

Five Female Wildcats Are the Ancestors of All Today's Domestic and Feral Cats

Gabriel and Parakeet

It seems extraordinary but based upon DNA research five female North African wildcats (felis silvestris lybica) are the ancestors of the entire world's approximate 500,000,000 house cats.  To reiterate; the research tells us is that all of today's domestic cats come from just these 5 female North African wildcats.  

The researchers concluded that five females of this species of wildcat made the transition from being wild to being semi-domesticated within settlements where they were safe from predators and where they had a ready supply of rodents as prey which infested the settlers' homes and granaries.

As all the feral cats in the world today come from domestic cats then we have to say that all of the domestic, stray and feral cats on the planet today are descended from five female cats of the species felis silvestris lybica.

The research was carried out by Carlos Driscoll of the US National Cancer Institute and colleagues including David MacDonald of Oxford University. They spent more than 6 years analysing the DNA of wildcats,  purebred cats and house cats.

They discovered that the DNA of all house cats (including of course purebred cats) fall within the DNA cluster of the Near Eastern wild cat.  This made this subspecies of wildcat the ancestor of the domestic cat.

Source: NY Times June 29th 2007. The photo is of my tabby cat in whom you can see the North African wildcat ancestor!



Featured Post

i hate cats

i hate cats, no i hate f**k**g cats is what some people say when they dislike cats. But they nearly always don't explain why. It appe...

Popular posts