WebProNews

Tag: scientific study

  • “Big Bang” Gravitational Waves: More Proof For Inflation

    For those that had doubts that there actually was a big explosion (big bang) in which our universe was born, there is more proof to support the theory.

    Although, there really isn’t a method for us to know precisely what happened 13.8 billion years ago, but scientists announced Monday a breakthrough in getting closer to supporting the big bang inflation theory.

    If this discovery passes all of the scrutiny by other scientists and physicists, on how the universe expanded in less than a trillionth of a second after the Big Bang, we might just be more certain.

    “It teaches us something crucial about how our universe began,” said Sean Carroll, a physicist at California Institute of Technology, who was not involved in the study. “It’s an amazing achievement that we humans, doing science systematically for just a few hundred years, can extend our understanding that far.”

    What’s more, researchers discovered direct evidence for the first time of what Albert Einstein predicted in his general theory of relativity: Gravitational waves.

    These are essentially ripples in space-time, which have been thought of as the “first tremors of the Big Bang,” according to the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.

    These waves that were thought (and known) to exist were seen by BICEP2 – Background Imaging of Cosmic Extragalactic Polarization 2 at America’s Amundsen-Scott Station- in the South Pole. It picked up the polarization of light left over from the early universe – which led to the proof many scientists have been searching for, but Einstein predicted.

    “This is huge,” says Marc Kamionkowski, professor of physics and astronomy at Johns Hopkins University, who was not involved in the discovery but who predicted back in 1997 how these gravitational wave imprints could be found. “It’s not every day that you wake up and find out something completely new about the early universe. To me this is as Nobel Prize–worthy as it gets.”

    They were described by physicists as ‘spectacular’ and ‘bigger than the Higgs boson’, the discovery provides the strongest evidence yet – that the universe went through a period of rapid inflation after the Big Bang.

    “Other than finding life on other planets or directly detecting dark matter, I can’t think of any other plausible near-term astrophysical discovery more important than this one for improving our understanding of the universe,” Caltech theoretical physicist Sean Carroll said on his blog.

    Image via YouTube

  • Doomsday Clock Still Set At Five Minutes To Midnight

    On Tuesday, Jan. 14, the Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists announced that the Doomsday Clock remains set at exactly five minutes until midnight.

    However, the Doomsday Clock doesn’t quite denote its name, but rather a ‘visual metaphor’ expressing the danger of a “civilization-threatening technological catastrophe.”

    According to CBS News, the board conducts an annual analysis of international threats, with an emphasis on nuclear arsenals and climate change. The results from the analysis ultimately determine where the minute hand should be on the Doomsday Clock. The closer the minute hand is to midnight represents a projection of how much closer the world may be to doom.

    The board offered a brief synopsis from their report addressing the pros and cons of technology and its worldly impact.

    “As always, new technologies hold the promise of doing great good, supplying new sources of clean energy, curing disease, and otherwise enhancing our lives. From experience, however, we also know that new technologies can be used to diminish humanity and destroy societies,” the board wrote. “We can manage our technology, or become victims of it. The choice is ours, and the Clock is ticking.”

    The board also issued an explanation in reference to the decision to keep the minute hand set at five minutes to midnight. According to Red Orbit, the board felt that the world collectively made ‘limited strides’ in reducing the threat of 2013.

    “Overall, however, in 2013 the international community dealt with the continuing, potentially civilization-ending threat of nuclear weapons in a business-as-usual manner, meaning that outsized nuclear arsenals remain in the United States and Russia, and the nuclear arsenals of some countries—notably India, Pakistan, and China—appear to be growing,” the board wrote.

    Although scientists did cite positive improvement and developments in the field of renewable energy, it was said that the worldwide effort to cease carbon dioxide emissions has stalled. The hindrance is the reason for the halt in climate change.

    The board’s analysis determined that the risk of civilization-threatening technological catastrophe is still high, which is the reason why the Doomsday Clock is still set at five minutes to midnight.

    “We implore the Secretary-General and the Security Council to spur worldwide action in the following areas to reduce the danger that human technology will be humanity’s undoing,” the report concluded.

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • Angelina Jolie Ups Cancer Awareness, Not Knowledge

    Angelina Jolie, despite not having held many large movie roles in recent years, is still one of the most followed stars in Hollywood – perhaps due to her good looks, philanthropic actions, and the fact that she is married to Brad Pitt. As such, Jolie holds much sway amongst the Hollywood community and the general public. So when Jolie released an op-ed in the New York times this May announcing she had undergone a double mastectomy in order to prevent herself from obtaining breast cancer, people paid attention.

    In a recent study conducted by the University of Maryland, researchers discovered that 74% of respondents (2,572 adults) knew of Jolie’s actions. As reported by the researchers, “When celebrities reveal health narratives, their stories have the potential to stimulate public interest and awareness of illness or medical procedures, inspire others to face similar medical issues, and promote public health policy. Media coverage of celebrity cancer experiences has been shown to impact health service utilization and adherence to preventive health guidelines…One study has shown a stronger impact of celebrity health narratives among the less educated and those who share demographic characteristics with the celebrity; another study has suggested that an emotional involvement with the celebrity may be influential..”

    But while Jolie’s op-ed may have raised breast cancer awareness amongst the general public, it did little to actually educate said populace about the science behind breast cancer itself. As previously stated, 74% of the respondents were aware of Jolie’s story, but fewer than 10% of the respondents actually understood the risk Jolie faced of developing breast cancer due to a genetic mutation, as opposed to someone who did not have the same mutation.

    Jolie’s situation was special because she discovered a mutation in the BRCA1 gene. People who experience a mutation in either the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes face five times the risk of developing breast cancer as opposed to those who have no mutation and experience a 10-30 times higher risk for ovarian cancer compared to the average individual.

    While the risk of developing cancer is higher for those with the BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations, the likelihood of having said mutation is low. According to the Mayo Clinic, BRCA mutations are responsible for “about 5 percent of breast cancers and about 10 to 15 percent of ovarian cancers.”

    In her op-ed, Jolie stated, “I choose not to keep my story private because there are many women who do not know that they might be living under the shadow of cancer. It is my hope that they, too, will be able to get gene tested, and that if they have a high risk they, too, will know that they have strong options.” Since the publishing of her op-ed, many facilities have reported an increase in requests to undergo gene testing. According to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, however, such testing could be detrimental to those for whom it is unnecessary: “The USPSTF recommends against routine genetic counseling or BRCA testing for women whose family history is not associated with an increased risk for mutations in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes.”

    The genetic testing can be detrimental for several different reasons. “Intensive screening for breast and ovarian cancer is associated with false-positive results, unnecessary imaging and unneeded surgery,” stated the USPSTF. Not only can the results be detrimental to one’s physical health, but also one’s bank account. Genetic testing to check for mutations in the BRCA gene runs around $3,000, which is a large sum of money to waste if one has no history of genetic mutation in one’s family.

    After gathering all the results of their survey, the researchers at the University of Maryland had one piece of advice for the general public who had read about Jolie’s experience: “While celebrities can bring heightened awareness to health issues, there is a need for these messages to be accompanied by more purposeful communication efforts to assist the public in understanding and using the complex diagnostic and treatment information that these stories convey.”

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • Oreo Cookies Just As Addictive As Cocaine, Study Says

    A new study from researchers at Connecticut College shows that Oreo cookies are just as addictive–to lab rats, anyway–as cocaine.

    The study aimed to show why we choose the foods we do as well as prove once and for all whether certain high-fat, high-sugar foods are indeed “addictive”. Everyone knows that a heartbreak can be eased with a carton of peanut butter fudge ice cream (preferably eaten in bed with a “Breaking Bad” marathon); but why do we choose the foods for comfort that are technically the worst for our bodies?

    According to Professor Joseph Schroeder, it’s because those foods activate more neurons in the brain’s pleasure center than even a highly addictive drug…like cocaine.

    “Our research supports the theory that high-fat/ high-sugar foods stimulate the brain in the same way that drugs do,” Schroeder said. “It may explain why some people can’t resist these foods despite the fact that they know they are bad for them.”

    The scientists said they placed rats in a maze that had an Oreo cookie on one side and a rice cake on the other. Given the option to choose which side they wanted to go to, the rats consistently chose the Oreo side. Next, a different group of rats were placed in a maze where they received a shot of cocaine or morphine solution on one side and a shot of saline on the other. The rats given the Oreos spent as much time on that side of their maze as the rats who chose the drugs. Neuroscience major Jamie Honohan says that the major concern with the study’s findings is that those sugary foods that create such a feeling of pleasure in our brains can have lasting affects on health, yet they are much cheaper and are more easily accessible than drugs.

    “My research interests stemmed from a curiosity for studying human behavior and our motivations when it comes to food,” said Honohan, who led the study out of curiosity regarding low-income families and the prevalence of fatty, sugary foods in their homes. “We chose Oreos not only because they are America’s favorite cookie, and highly palatable to rats, but also because products containing high amounts of fat and sugar are heavily marketed in communities with lower socioeconomic statuses.”

    The researchers said that perhaps the most surprising part of the study was that the rats ate the Oreos just like many humans do: by breaking them apart and eating the middle first.