Climate Talks in Lima, Peru: Closing Results

Source: http://blogs.dickinson.edu/cop20/

From 1 to 12 December, 195 countries met to discuss and negotiate the aims of an agreement by climate change... In the wee hours of the night, agreements were made but many of the major decisions were left to be decided until next year. However, this could impact the ability to meet the currently agreed-upon decrease of emissions. But many countries are concerned about the financial aspects of this agreement. While this is perhaps more understandable for the less wealthy countries, the fact that China has declined a drafted decision made by the United States and European Union is astounding. In fact, it's down right flabbergasting.

"Around lunchtime on Saturday, a draft of a decision that the U.S., the European Union and other wealthy states wanted adopted was rejected by representatives of China, African nations, and other poor and developing nations, angry that issues important to them had been omitted." Source: Discovery News

However, some progress was made:

"The Lima Accord, a four-page document, was adopted by climate negotiators a little after 1 a.m. ET Sunday. It was unanimously agreed upon following talks that were at times acrimonious and concluded more than 30 hours behind schedule.
While member countries tacitly agreed to curb their rates of greenhouse gas emissions, a raft of things weren’t decided, adding hurdles to securing a truly global climate agreement in Paris next December.
A large schism separated wealthy states and developing nations before negotiations ever began in Lima, and on many fronts, those divides remain. Rich and poor countries could not agree on language to resolve issues like financing for climate adaptation or compensation for damage inflicted by climate change. Nor could they agree on the groundrules to determine each country’s commitment to cut carbon pollution or whether to make those commitments legally binding under international law." Source: Environmental News Network

While it's great that these talks are happening, it's frustrating that what is holding countries back from cutting emissions is a fictitious creation made by man, called the economy... what will it take for humans to realize we need to change what we're doing - and not by a little bit - if we expect to see changes in our climate??



Other Related Articles:
Discovery News - Global Warming: Why only 95 Percent Certainty? 
NASA - A Year in the Life of Earth's CO2
NASA - A Closer Look at Carbon Dioxide 

Geometry in Nature

In nature, there are some of the most beautiful patters, designs, and structures from the most miniscule particles and organisms, such as phytoplankton, to large expressions of life in the greater cosmos. Many of these structures are geometrical - symmetrical by design - and were used by humans in the early Greek, Egyptian, Roman and ancient Indians for architecture construction. Most humans used the Pythagorean Theorem by measurements of the human body, but this is only one of nature's form of geometrical archetypes. There are many other forms of archetypal expressions in nature, including vibrational resonance. However, an underlying law of nature is the inseparable relationship of the part to the whole, and thus brings a sense of interconnectedness and inseparability for all things created. Some people call this the "Golden Ratio" that is related to "Sacred Geometry".

Source: http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/2b/54/dd/2b54ddc1258231e27a61414f2e5eb5ea.jpg

According to Wikipedia:

"Sacred geometry is used as a religious, philosophical, and spiritual term to explain the fundamental laws of the universe covering Pythagorean geometry and the perceived relationships between geometrical laws and quantum mechanical laws of the universe that create the geometrical patterns in nature. Many Gothic cathedrals were built using proportions derived from the geometry inherent in the cube and double-cube; this tradition continues in modern Christian churches to the present time.[4] churches, temples, mosques, religious monuments, altars, tabernacles; as well as for sacred spaces such as temenoi, sacred groves, village greens and holy wells, and the creation of religious art.

Source: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiLcjVlOMpJdvS_nQQAPkfTJYMSUHk1cYtANIk4QjicLmvMKn6BllUXiLeQV0-aC-qqHM9hCxS2aIyD1A99LE-NoQM0BAh1CuGFUJaeGHYL12slE0uLau83unL4-aN6FYsxnxmLKXTJSLo/s640/parthenongoldenratio.png

Source: http://hoffnermath.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/pythagoreansnail2.jpg

According to Stephen Skinner, the study of sacred geometry has its roots in the study of nature, and the mathematical principles at work therein.^[3] Many forms observed in nature can be related to geometry, for example, the chambered nautilus grows at a constant rate and so its shell forms a logarithmic spiral to accommodate that growth without changing shape. Also, honeybees construct hexagonal cells to hold their honey. These and other correspondences are sometimes interpreted in terms of sacred geometry and considered to be further proof of the natural significance of geometric forms."

The image below is a diatom... a phytoplankton that displays it's natural geometric form in a delicate, yet robust structure.  How fascinating it is, that life is surrounded by geometry; nature is geometry!

Source: http://fineartamerica.com/featured/73-diatom-sem-steve-gschmeissner.html

Organic Farming Competes with Conventional

Source: http://images.sciencedaily.com/2013/03/130326121732-large.jpg

By in large, the public viewpoint is in agreement that organic food is safer, healthier, and tastier than the conventional food 1 2 3. However, depending on where you live, organic food may or may not be available or economically feasible. So, what's going on with organic farming - will more become available in greater areas? Here is a report from the Environmental News Network:

"A systematic overview of more than 100 studies comparing organic and conventional farming finds that the crop yields of organic agriculture are higher than previously thought. The study, conducted by UC Berkeley researchers, also found that certain practices could further shrink the productivity gap between organic crops and conventional farming.
The study, to be published online Wednesday, Dec. 10, in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B, tackles the lingering perception that organic farming, while offering an environmentally sustainable alternative to chemically intensive agriculture, cannot produce enough food to satisfy the world’s appetite.
“In terms of comparing productivity among the two techniques, this paper sets the record straight on the comparison between organic and conventional agriculture,” said the study’s senior author, Claire Kremen, professor of environmental science, policy and management and co-director of the Berkeley Food Institute. “With global food needs predicted to greatly increase in the next 50 years, it’s critical to look more closely at organic farming, because aside from the environmental impacts of industrial agriculture, the ability of synthetic fertilizers to increase crop yields has been declining.”
The researchers conducted a meta-analysis of 115 studies — a dataset three times greater than previously published work — comparing organic and conventional agriculture. They found that organic yields are about 19.2 percent lower than conventional ones, a smaller difference than in previous estimates.
The researchers pointed out that the available studies comparing farming methods were often biased in favor of conventional agriculture, so this estimate of the yield gap is likely overestimated. They also found that taking into account methods that optimize the productivity of organic agriculture could minimize the yield gap. They specifically highlighted two agricultural practices, multi-cropping (growing several crops together on the same field) and crop rotation, that would substantially reduce the organic-to-conventional yield gap to 9 percent and 8 percent, respectively.
The yields also depended upon the type of crop grown, the researchers found. There were no significant differences in organic and conventional yields for leguminous crops, such as beans, peas and lentils, for instance.
Continue reading at UC Berkeley."

REFERENCES
1 White, Kim Kennedy; Duram, Leslie A (2013). America Goes Green: An Encyclopedia of Eco-friendly Culture in the United States. California: ABC-CLIO. p. 180. ISBN 978-1-59884-657-7.
2 Dan Flynn for Food Safety News. April 22, 2014. Report: Organic Industry Achieved 25 Years of Fast Growth Through Fear and Deception
3 Joanna Schroeder for Academics Review. Organic Marketing Report 

Pharmaceuticals Affect Plants, Crops, & Our Oceans

Many of us take some form of pharmaceutical at some point in our lives - sometimes for acute pain such as a headache, and other times for chronic conditions or situations such as high blood pressure, or even for the intent of parent planning - but have you ever wondered what happens to the chemicals that your body doesn't metabolize?

Source: http://media.treehugger.com/assets/images/2011/10/drugs-water.jpg

The following article was released from  Drugs Released in Environment Affect Plants

"The drugs we release into the environment are likely to have a significant impact on plant growth, finds a new study led by the University of Exeter Medical School and Plymouth University.
By assessing the impacts of a range of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, the research has shown that the growth of edible crops can be affected by these chemicals – even at the very low concentrations found in the environment.
Published in the Journal of Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, the research focused its analysis on lettuce and radish plants and tested the effects of several commonly prescribed drugs, including diclofenac and ibuprofen. These drugs are among the most common and widely used group of pharmaceuticals, with more than 30 million prescribed across the world every day.
The potential for these chemicals to influence plants is becoming increasingly relevant, particularly as waste management systems are unable to remove many compounds from our sewage. Drugs for human use make their way into soil through a number of routes, including the use of sewage sludge as fertiliser and waste water for irrigation.
This study looked for a number of changes in edible plants, assessing factors such as water content, root and shoot length, overall size and how effectively the plants photosynthesised.
Each drug was shown to affect the plants in very specific ways, with marked differences between drugs that are closely related. For example, drugs from the fenamic acid class affected the growth of radish roots, whilst ibuprofen had a significant influence on the early root development of lettuce plants.
Dr Clare Redshaw, one of the scientists leading the project at the Medical School’s European Centre for Environment & Human Health, said: “The huge amounts of pharmaceuticals we use ultimately end up in the environment, yet we know very little about their effects on flora and fauna. As populations age and generic medicines become readily available, pharmaceutical use will rise dramatically and it’s essential we take steps towards limiting environmental contamination. We haven’t considered the impact on human health in this study, but we need to improve our understanding quickly so that appropriate testing and controls can be put in place.”
There have been growing concerns about the presence of pharmaceuticals in the environment, particularly as evidence emerges of the effects they can have on the development of animals and antibiotic resistance in bacteria. Yet their ability to affect plant growth is poorly understood.
Continue reading at the University of Exeter."

... A similar article can be found from ScienceDaily

Agricultural and Biofuel News: The critical role crops play in the Earth's CO2 cycle

Source: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg70aTBQaVhuE53Dfs0XXWmx6PSzA14-VRWt02JPoFi-zRhJRgTal0AOHdqqz7aOwLbHZNhRUbdhrSsZ9-IbOMWejkB0MpJyJm3ZtPmgUmBtZ3uJtRdwAkllqdaJFJvqA65ZD1XJagwq4JY/s1600/IMG_2339.JPG

Agricultural and Biofuel News: The critical role crops play in the Earth's CO2 cycle

"Each year, the planet balances its budget. The carbon dioxide
absorbed by plants in the spring and summer as they convert solar energy
into food is released back to the atmosphere in autumn and winter.
Levels of the greenhouse gas fall, only to rise again.

But the budget has gotten bigger. Over the last five decades, the magnitude of
this rise and fall has grown nearly 50 percent in the Northern
Hemisphere, as the amount of the greenhouse gas taken in and released
has increased. Now, new research shows that humans and their crops have a
lot to do with it, highlighting the profound impact people have on the
Earth’s atmosphere.

In a study published Wednesday, Nov. 19, in Nature, scientists at Boston University, the University of New Hampshire, the University of Michigan, the University of Minnesota, the
University of Wisconsin-Madison and McGill University show that a steep
rise in the productivity of crops grown for food accounts for as much as
25 percent of the increase in this carbon dioxide (CO2) seasonality.

It’s not that crops are adding more CO2 to the atmosphere; rather, if crops
are like a sponge for CO2, the sponge has simply gotten bigger and can
hold and release more of the gas.

With global food productivity expected to double over the next 50 years, the researchers say the findings should be used to improve climate models and better understand
the atmospheric CO2 buffering capacity of ecosystems, particularly as
climate change may continue to perturb the greenhouse gas budget."

Immune Systems - Adaptive and Innate

Goodness me, it's been a while since I've actually posted something. But not for a lack of interesting topics, science news, or ideas that have crossed my mind. In fact, I have at least a dozen draft blogs running right now. In due time I shall complete these drafts and post them - sooner rather than later - to keep up with my goal of an averaged post per week. But onwards and forwards with looking into the Immune System!

Source: http://www.eiu.edu/herc/coldfluprevention.php

As the Autumn weather is really starting to kick in, and as I've been starting to spend more time indoors to get away from the rain, I've been hearing more sniffling, sneezing, and coughing - it's the cold season - particularly in areas with high numbers of people such as corporate offices, universities, colleges, schools, and coffee shops. For those of us in the temperate latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere, we're all familiar with the cold season and many of us will be getting the sniffles at some point.

This got me to thinking (by no surprise that I'm obsessed with primary productivity) about the immune system of plants. Surely, plants are exposed to diseases, viruses, and bacteria that deplete their immune systems, just as we are? But actually, plants don't have quite the same immune capabilities as many animals do. In fact, there are two types of immune responses: adaptive and innate. (See the Crash Course YouTube video below)

In the former, adaptive response is found in vertebrate animals and is a highly complex system that allows for an immunological memory to be stored so that after an initial exposure to a pathogen (think: viral, fungal, or bacterial illness), any subsequent attacks by the same pathogen is recognized and the immune response is enhanced. In humans, you may have heard of T-cells that stay in your body after you've been ill. These are "memory" cells and are the very reason humans bother with vaccinations - introducing a human body to a particular pathogen to prevent illness or disease - and are only valuable to vertebrate animals that have adaptive immune systems.

Now, the latter type of immune response, the innate or non-specific immune system, is evolutionarily an older system developed and utilized by plants, fungi, insects, and the more primitive multicellular organisms. The first response an organisms with an innate immune system has is physical, chemical, or biological. Once the invader is recognized by cellular mechanisms, responses differ depending on the organism that is reviewed - plants do not respond exactly the same way as an invertebrate - but there are similarities: inflammation, mucus production, chemical flooding, temperature change, or necrosis (the killing of cellular tissues). What's fascinating though, is that every class of pathogens that infect humans, can infect plants, it's just their response to it that is different.

Since I'm obsessed with primary productivity, obviously my personal interest is in looking deeper into the innate immune response of plants. However, another blog shall be created to go further in depth of plant pathology, for those that are interested. For the purposes of this blog, I shall attempt to keep it simple.

The innate immune system is distinguished by two pathways: 1) Extracellular recognition on the surface of the plant, and 2) Intracellular signaling within the cell of the plant.

Source: http://germzoo.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/running-away-is-not-option-or-how.html

Unlike adaptive systems found in animals, plants do not have mobile T-cells to engulf the pathogen. Instead, they have surveillance systems that are made up of receptors that detect the presence of a "foreign" pathogenic cell that allows for the innate immune system to respond. The plant then excretes specific physical (e.g. cuticle thickening) chemical (e.g. toxins) or biological (e.g. necrosis) responses to protect itself against the pathogen. The complexity of plant immune systems is based upon protein selection pressure, of which there are 56 potential immune elicitor proteins according to the University of Toronto.  The molecular work being done to identify the genomic arena for plant pathogens is part of a whole field of work dedicated to plant pathology. Perhaps at a later date I shall blog about epigenetics and phenotypic plasticity. But for now, this is still pretty cool (or at least in my opinion) -- Just like humans, preservation in the form of survival is essential, and plants are no exception!

All organisms, regardless of the type or habitat use defense mechanisms to protect itself, and their immune systems are just one of many techniques designed to do that. How cool is that??

Human bodies, the body of a microbe, a plant, an insect, or the dog or cat in the neighborhood has a continually functional system that is designed to protect them from any harmful pathogen and it's working all the time. Perhaps overtime, as the natural cycle of time places those of us in the Northern Hemisphere at the entry of the cold season.

Be safe, stay healthy, and enjoy the shift in season, as the immune system continues to work its magic!

Other Sources:
 

Gaffney, T., Friedrich, L., Vernooij, B., Negrotto, D., Nye, G., Uknes, S., … Ryals, J. (2014). Requirement of Salicylic Acid for the Induction of Systemic Acquired Resistance, 261(5122), 754–756.

Jones, J. D. G., & Dangl, J. L. (2006). The plant immune system. Nature, 444(7117), 323–9. doi:10.1038/nature05286

Kwon, C., Bednarek, P., & Schulze-Lefert, P. (2008). Secretory pathways in plant immune responses. Plant Physiology, 147(4), 1575–83. doi:10.1104/pp.108.121566

McCann, H. C., Nahal, H., Thakur, S., & Guttman, D. S. (2012). Identification of innate immunity elicitors using molecular signatures of natural selection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(11), 4215–20. doi:10.1073/pnas.1113893109

Ton, J. (n.d.). The plant immune system: a multitasking regulator of parasitic and mutualistic interactions. Publicationsarchive.hgca.com. Retrieved from http://publicationsarchive.hgca.com/publications/documents/Jurriaan_Ton.pdf

Global Crisis & Positive Choice

After my last post, this is worth watching...

Global Warming Trends, 2014

A few days back I read an article about global warming.  The thesis was an interesting read, but full of scientific jargon that could turn even the most determined person cross-eyed.  So, rather than give you a link to such a daunting read, for your viewing pleasure, here is a link to the ScienceDaily report:


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/09/140921145005.htm

However, the bottom line is this: 

Human activites contribute to an increased rate of global warming, and will continue to do so with the status quo. 

"The IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report collated from the peer-reviewed literature almost 1200 scenarios of future emissions, each scenario having a different 'story' of how the future might unfold. The scenarios can be grouped according to which of the four Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) they are most similar to, based on peak concentration of greenhouse gases.

Credit: Image courtesy of CICERO"

Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/09/140921145005.htm

Due to emissions created by humans through the burning of fossil fuels, our planet will warm faster than it would on its own.  What burns fossil fuels, you may ask?  Fossil fuels are formed by a natural process using organic materials (dead organisms) that have taken Earth hundreds of thousands, to millions of years to make.  We burn them for things like electricity via coal, petrol for your car, natural gas for your hob/stove, fuel for the airplane, train, or ship that carries you or the goods you buy.  Unfortunately, there's a limited amount available and we're burning it faster than Earth can replace it, and in the process, we are increasing the emission of carbon and other hardy chemicals that deplete Earth's Ozone layer, and thus the greenhouse that keeps us safe.

Sure, it's true that Earth goes through normal cycles of ice ages, as has been shown through fossil records, sediment cores, and geologic studies.  But, a question I cannot help but ask is this: Why would such an intelligent species, the Homo sapiens, continue a behaviour that is ultimately going to bring it harm?  The only answer I can think of, leads down a path of negativity and labeling - that we are greedy, gluttonous, money-driven, and/or selfish - but perhaps there is more to it than that?  Biologically speaking, animals (including humans) are designed to make decisions for survival.  Considering the conditions of the world, from third to first, is it any wonder that most people are doing whatever necessary to survive, in the best (or perhaps only) way they know how?

No matter where you live or what your occupation, we all need food, shelter, and a sense of connection (usually to one another and/or the environment) to survive.  But with the system created as it has been - by humans - it is rarely possible to survive without money, because that is what has been deemed valuable.  In first-world countries, humans are fortunate to have the pleasures of fossil-fuel consuming sources that provide entertainment, vehicles, industry, and synthetics.  In fact, according to the the article:

"The top-four emitters of CO₂ have a critical role in global emissions growth:

• Chinese emissions grew at 4.2%, due to slower economic growth and faster improvements in carbon intensity of the economy compared to the previous decade
• USA emissions increased 2.9%, due to a rebound in coal consumption potentially reversing the downward trend since the start of the shale-gas boom in 2007
• Indian emissions grew at 5.1%, due to robust economic growth and a continued increase in the carbon intensity of the economy
• EU28 emissions decreased 1.8%, due to a weak economy and emission decreases in some countries offsetting a return to coal led by Poland, Germany, Finland"

Apparently, China is producing more emissions than the US and EU combined.  Frankly, these numbers are terrifying.  But, what is the answer??  Is someone, or a group of people, really going to make the kind of life-style changes necessary to make a difference?  And, just what would that difference be - if Earth is going to increase in temperature on it's own, anyways?  These are all questions I've asked and have heard my peers ask.  Do we give up, say that the snowball is already rolling?  Or do we start making changes in our lifestyles and how we run the economy?  The United Nations (UN) has tried to engage leading countries to address this problem, but as with many things, it's a choice.  In this case, it's a choice of our leaders and the leaders of other countries to enforce law and regulation.  In October, the UN is holding their sixth of it's second conference in Bonn, Germany, to talk about Climate Change Impacts.  It will be interesting to see what their session will lead to, and you can follow at:

http://unfccc.int/2860.php

As for what we, as individuals and communities can do, it's as far reaching as your imagination can hold.  But, it's a matter of personal judgement, morals, and ethics.  Honestly, I cannot say what that looks like for any individual, because this is when it becomes personal. It is a matter of how much you care and how much you're willing to change.  For me, this is a moral battle I struggle with.  Obviously, I like to travel; I have a vehicle, a laptop, an iPod, and plenty of clothes; and I too, contribute to the emissions system...  Perhaps this is an opportunity to start thinking about my energy consumption and use more seriously.  Perhaps this is an opportunity for all of us to think about it.

There are many things we can do, but not all of it is honest - "green" labeling doesn't necessarily mean green - many of the products sold to promote energy savings doesn't actually help the environment.  Just as a few examples:

-  Those twisty energy "saving" lightbulbs?  Yeah, those contain mercury and are exceedingly difficult to dispose of, let alone recycle.

-  "Electronic" copies of information or paper?  Yeah, the servers utilized to store the data need to stay cool, and require temperature controlled rooms, frequently using A/C.  Oh, and the materials the servers are made of?  It's not cost effective to recycle most of it.

-  "Energy saving" vehicles?  *HAHA* I find that succession of words such an oxymoron...  those batteries can be more damaging to Earth than the exhaust from a normal vehicle.

But, back on track - this article was a wake-up, a reminder - the choices we make today form the future of tomorrow.

May we all stop to think about our choices and how it effects the future of our children, seven generations in time. 

"If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem" - Proverb

Trophic Cascade: Interconnection

How Wolves Change Rivers from Sustainable Man on Vimeo.

Source: http://vimeo.com/86466357


This video is a reminder of the complexity of our environment.  Far too often, we are told that a whole is the sum of all it's parts; that 2 + 2 = 4; everything can be broken down into an equation.  Well, if that were true, and a whole is the sum of all it's parts, then why can humans not take bits and pieces of a body, laser it together, fill it with blood, and zap it to life??  All the pieces are there, yes?  So, why doesn't Frankenstein exist, why did the theory not work?  In my own opinion, and one I will own, is because there is an element that lies outside of the equation.  Something that humans have yet to quantify, but has been qualified and understood by Earthen people for eons.  Call it whatever you like, but there is something more to life than the pieces we see or can calculate.

"When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the universe." - John Muir

There are many people who have spent their life trying to understand the complexities of ecological communities, but none are quite as influential as John Muir. Born in 1838 in Dunbar, Scotland, John Muir spent his life advocating the preservation of the wilderness in the United States after moving there with his family in 1849.  He was a naturalist that paved the way for current-day ecologists, and was an activist for the preservation of Yellowstone, Yosemite, Sequoia National Park, and in 1892 he co-founded the Sierra Club. Mr. Muir is known as the "Father of the National Parks" in the United States... THANK YOU MR. MUIR!!!

It is of utmost importance that we start to understand the cause and effect of our actions, choices, and every-day habits.  Life on Earth is far more interconnected than we often give credence.  The future of our children, and the planet, is our responsibility.  Choosing to turn a blind eye is choosing death - maybe not for you right at this moment - for the next generation.

"You would have thought that our first priority would be to ask what the ecologists are finding out, because we have to live within the conditions and principles they define.  Instead, we've elevated the economy above ecology." - David Suzuki 

http://akellyphoto.com/html/wildlife/mammals/wolf/wolf-in-river.jpg

Let us not forget how wolves can influence a river!!!

As a challenge, let's start (or continue) asking these questions: 

- FOOD: Where does it come from, and is it sustainable?
     Money speaks and what we buy we financially support; "vote" with your money.

- CONSUMABLES: Can I recycle this?  
     Recycle!!  Electronics, cardboard, paper, plastic, food...  if your local legislation does not offer this, start to demand it!

- TRANSPORTATION: Can I take a bus, train, or cycle? 
     Taking the bus rather than driving your own car decreases carbon emissions. This isn't about social class, it's about putting the environment before your image.

- ENERGY: How much does this task cost Earth?
     Let's not waste energy and increase pollution.
      

Outdoor Wellbeing: Autumn

Source: mooreaseal.tumblr.com

The physiological and psychological benefits of being outdoors is unarguably good for human health. It battles depression, boosts morale, and it increases physical well-being 1 2 3. The natural environment increases your sense of happiness 4! But, much of the demands on our day to day lives make it easy to push it further down the priority list. We make excuses: "I've got to do _(insert here)_", "I'll get to it tomorrow", or "it's too cold/wet/windy/rainy/etc"... that last one is one of the most unfortunate excuses, in my opinion. When you were a kid, did a bit of rain stop you from getting your wellies or rain boots out to go stomp around in the puddles? Did the dirt keep you from making those mud-pies, or picking up the branch that was your new-found sword? Perhaps it did, but for many of us, those things didn't matter. So, why should it now? Do you have access to a shower, bath, or at a minimum, access to a sink or wet-wipes for your hands? And a washer for your clothes? Don't let the 'adult' mind keep you from letting your inner child outside to play; let your imagination soar! Take a walk, go for a run, walk the dog, play with your kids, hunt for fungi, watch the leaves fall from the trees, or simply enjoy the subtle change of crispness in the air refresh your senses as you wander through a park, path, trail, your backyard, or down the street.

Autumn is one of the most beautiful times of year. The leaves are changing colour, dancing in the wind before blanketing Earth's floor with golden, red, and orange hues. Let the season ease you into the comforts of the hearth or fireplace, with the warmth of a blanket and hot cup of tea, chocolate, or mulled wine.

Yes, we do live demanding lives. But take the opportunity to make your health and well-being a priority. Not just for your own benefit (as if that isn't enough), but for those around you - family, friends, colleagues, strangers - because regular activity outdoors makes for a happier person  Enjoy the outdoors, regardless of the season - get that new winter jacket or your favourite coloured wellies/rain boots - enjoy wherever you live, and explore the area!

Sources: 
1     Morgan, K., & Bath, P. A. (1998). Customary physical activity and psychological wellbeing: a longitudinal study. Age and ageing, 27(suppl 3), 35-40.

2     Pryor, A., Carpenter, C., & Townsend, M. (2005). Outdoor education and bush adventure therapy: A social-ecological approach to health and wellbeing. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 9(1), 3-13.

3     Thompson Coon, J., Boddy, K., Stein, K., Whear, R., Barton, J., & Depledge, M. H. (2011). Does participating in physical activity in outdoor natural environments have a greater effect on physical and mental wellbeing than physical activity indoors? A systematic review. Environmental science & technology, 45(5), 1761-1772.

4     MacKerron, G., & Mourato, S. (2013). Happiness is greater in natural environments. Global Environmental Change, 23(5), 992-1000.

FACTOID: Animals Understand Fairness

Animals understand fairness. Dr. Sarah Brosnan from Georgia State University, USA, has been studying the psychology and behaviour of primates.  The study has concluded that fairness has evolved to support cooperation over long periods of time.

"Giving up an outcome that benefits you in order to gain long-term benefits from the relationship requires not only an ability to think about the future, but also the self-control to turn down a reward," Brosnan said. "These both require a lot of cognitive control. Therefore, we hypothesize that lots of species respond negatively to getting less than a partner, which is the first step in the evolution of fairness, but only a few species are able to make the leap to this second step, which leads to a true sense of fairness." 1

----- 
A few of my own thoughts:

Humans are highly complex beings - and yes, we are of the animal kingdom - not exempt from the measurement of "fairness". When we think about what is fair or not fair, how often do we consider the "other" person, friend, or stranger? In your job, at the gym, walking down the street, or in your home, what do you consider to be "fair"? Surely, everyone has a slightly different opinion, but perhaps fairness is more than one thing: law, social, emotional, procedural, environmental, interactional, distributive, economical, etc...

From my own experience, I believe that all people wish for all aspects of their life to be "fair", but I think balanced equality may be misunderstood with exact equality. Perhaps what you have is not the same as your neighbour, or that of your kin, but when you start to look at what you do have, does it balance out? Relationships may be taken for granted; food on the table; jobs; shelter; the environment in which you live; clean water... the list goes on.

Today, take a moment to reflect upon what you are thankful for. We may not be receiving cucumbers and grapes, but humans have an advantage: the intellect to examine the difference between exact equality and balanced equality. Let our ability to cooperate be a strength!!

Further Reading:

Sarah F. Brosnan and Frans B. M. de Waal. Evolution of responses to (un)fairness. Science, 18 September 2014 DOI: 10.1126/science.1251776

Sarah F. Brosnan, Frans B. M. de Waal. Monkeys reject unequal pay. Nature, 2003; 425 (6955): 297 DOI: 10.1038/nature01963


1  Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/09/140918141151.htm

Back on Track - A Personal Note

"Education is the kindling of a flame, not the filling of a vessel." - Socrates

Life is a funny thing. When I first started this blog, I thought "YES! I'm going to do this"... a year later and I'm finally making a point of following through with it. Excuses are excuses; if something is important to you, it will be done or you will find an excuse. However, for the purpose of my ego I'm going to say that the last year was spent obtaining Masters of Science and my brain was too far immersed in the realm of biology to think much beyond the next deadline, let alone whether my socks matched. Completed and dusted now, it's time to get back to what really matters to me by making time for it.

As a scientist, living in the world of the 'highly technical', I've often wondered what the point of science is, if not to share the findings with the future generations? Granted, time must be spent to break things down into digestible jargon for those not in the deep in the field of choice, but that is time well spent in my personal opinion.

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." - Albert Einstein

So, a few of my aims in the next twelve months are as follows:
- An average of one blog per week, or at least two a month (leeway for those busy months...)
- Focus on current events that people can relate to in their daily lives
- Open a "request" section for people to specify topics of particular interest
- Open a "guest" page for other scientists to post their own work/ideas/thoughts for the general public
- Start a "kids" page to give the wee ones some of their own food for thought
- To learn throughout the experience without expectation of what "should" be learned

To be fair, this is a hefty list but one I shall aim for. After all, Norman Vincent Peale said, "Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss you'll land among the stars."

Source: http://family-budgeting.co.uk/2013/10/07/monday-money-quote-environment-vs-economy/