Category Archives: Uncategorized

Laughing Gas – No Laughing Matter

Laughing gas (LG) and its associated health consequences can be unpredictable, especially in young people who abuse LG for recreational uses.

 

LG, commonly known as whippets, funky balloon, or hippy crack, is a colourless, odorless, sweet-tasting NO2. Dentists and medical professionals routinely use NO2 as an inhalational anaesthesia during minor medical procedures, childbirth, and ambulances for its anaesthetic properties, including pain-relieving effect and anti-anxiety effects. They are typically mixed with oxygen in a 2:1 or 1:1 oxygen:NO2 ratio to prevent oxygen starvation from high dosage or pure NO2 usage without supplemental oxygen, which is the case in recreational uses. The gas readily displaces air in the lung from reaching into the bloodstream, reducing the oxygen content in tissues and brain (hypoxia), causing suffocation (asphyxiation), heart attack, or unconsciousness that can lead to sudden death or severe brain damage. These risks increase drastically in people with a history of cardiac and respiratory diseases

 

For non-medical uses, NO2 typically comes in small, finger-length steel canisters that users can purchase separately at any local grocery store as a propellant for whipped cream bottles (Figure 1). Nightclubs will use industrial tanks (Figure 2) that can fill up about 200 balloons and sell each for $5-$10. A clubber who wished to keep his identity anonymous said his friends can easily spend anywhere from $1,000 to $10,000 per night solely on NO2 balloon. One inhalation of NO2 can lead to lightheadedness, tingling in the arms and legs, drug-induced psychoactive effects, including brief euphoric high, temporary distortion of visual and sensory perceptions, and lack of coordination, all of which subsides after a few minutes of discontinuing.

Figure 1: A box of whippets with sealed ends that users can puncture to release gas. Source: Wikimedia

 

Figure 2: Industrial Tanks of Nitrous Oxide mixed Oxygen In Dentistry. Source: Wikimedia

The 2014 Global Drug Survey reported about 64% out of over 6800 NO2 users consumed five or less balloons per session. The majority of responders reported using less than 3 balloons per session, followed by 4-10 balloons, 11-50 balloons, and over 100 balloons (Figure 3). To maintain the short-lived rush of euphoric high, Garakani et al. reported a small number of abused NO users can go through 75 -125 whippets per session. 

Figure 3: Summary of responses on the number of balloons consumed per session from a survey of 6800 people.

Recreational users inhale NO2 by releasing the gas from a whippet into a balloon, and directly inhaling it through the mouth. Short-term NO2 exposure via balloons is still relatively safe, but several fatal cases reported in NO2 users who tried other methods. For example, inhaling the gas directly from the canister delivers the freezing NO2 gas directly to the internal tissue, causing frostbite to the mouth, lungs, or vocal cord. Excessive, continuous inhaling of NO2 while placing a plastic bag over their head, can lead to severe hypoxia and eventually asphyxial deaths. The short-lived euphoric high and easy access of whippets together contribute to the growing popularity in recreational NO2 misuse in many countries, most prominently in the UK

The Toba catastrophe

If you trekked through the mountains of northern Sumatra you might see one very long, serene lake and a sizable oblong island in its middle. The whole thing looks very peaceful until you realize it came to be through a cataclysm of unimaginable proportions.

Around 74,000 years ago in those mountains, a supervolcano was brewing world changing fires that erupted suddenly and violently. 

Around 2800 km³ of material was released in an outpouring of hot gasses and volcanic ash that wreaked havoc on an area of approximately 20000 km² around the volcano. This means that an area the size of modern day Slovenia was vaporized, since the temperature of these initial volcanic ejections can reach upwards of a 1000 °C.  Ash deposits are found today as far away as the eastern parts of Africa.

Scientists say that a global winter ensued which devastated human populations around the

world, leaving only a few surviving groups in the denvse forests of Africa. Investigations of the human genome have revealed that modern humans within Africa possess much higher genetic diversity than do humans outside of Africa. Evidence from studies of mitochondrial DNA suggests that humans passed through what is known as a genetic bottleneck: a profound decrease in genetic diversity and a fall in the total human population to a few thousand breeding pairs. This is known as the Toba catastrophe theory.

In recent years, more evidence and more precise dating of the eruption timeline paints a different, more interesting picture. Some researchers posit that human beings didn’t just survive, but even thrived after the eruption. We have found ancient tools on African coastlines both above and below the layer of ash deposited by Toba. Interestingly, a greater number and diversity of tools seem to be found after the explosion. 

The climate data is complicated. Studies of ice cores reveal that the earth cooled drastically right after the eruption and there followed several years of lower precipitation. But other data suggest that certain species of plants recovered quickly after the event, and fossil evidence indicates that orangutang populations close to the area didn’t drop much either.

Scientists now believe that Toba didn’t release a huge amount of sulfuric acid aerosols as compared with other volcanoes, which contribute significantly to the cooling effect. The chemical composition of the magma might have been such that proceeding winter was substantially less intense, and it is theorized that a lot of water vapor might have been released which actually would have counteracted the cooling effect.

The mystery is far from solved. A recent 2021 study looked at the effect of the eruption on the ozone layer, and concluded that it would have made possible for a lot of dangerous UV light to reach the surface of the earth, killing off a lot of humans in the process. Then there is the glaring observation that Neanderthals went extinct only 30000 years ago, long after Toba. 

So, there are a lot of unknowns. The only thing we know for certain is that earth will see another Toba at some point in the future, and the fallout could be much, much worse.

Population growth: limited by pesticides?

The United Nations (UN) forecasts the world population to reach 9.3 billion by 2050. According to them, a 60% increase in food production will be required to sustain the population.

Solution: increasing pesticide use.

Unsplash Photo by @Arjun MJ (Ernakulam, Outdoors)

Unsplash Photo by @Arjun MJ (Ernakulam, Outdoors) Unsplash

Pesticides are chemicals that repel or kill weeds and organisms that affect plant growth. 

The United States first introduced pesticides in the 1930s (during the Great Depression when the population was 2 billion) because of their considerable increase in yields. Since then, according to the World Health Organization (WHO), over 1000 types of pesticides are used globally today.

Many people stand by organic products, which use minimal pesticides. There are several reasons why people opt out of consuming products grown with pesticides:

Many synthetic pesticides cannot be broken down by humans or animals. Because of this, they bioaccumulate (simply substances that become concentrated in living organisms) as body fat.

Pesticides also pose a huge threat to aquatic ecosystems. They contaminate ground and freshwater supplies used by wildlife, livestock, crops and people.

In 2020, Boedeker et al in the BMC Public Health Journal, estimated about 385 million people annually get pesticide poisoning.

These are only three reasons why people don’t like pesticides, but there are many more.

With that said, pesticides were first introduced to solve an issue in 1930 – an issue that will soon present itself again: food shortage. 

There’s an interesting theory called the Malthusian Trap, which describes how increased agricultural production as a result of advanced agricultural techniques increases the population. But with a greater population, there’s a greater need for consumption, and that strains the food supplies. 

Based on a 2017 study of European farming systems, if pesticides were removed from agricultural practice, there could be a 78% loss in fruit production, a 54% decrease in vegetable harvest and a 32% loss in grain yields.

Pesticides provide greater food output, increase farmers’ earnings, improve practice, prevent diseases, and allow cultivation in areas that would otherwise be uncultivable. 

Simply, they allow farmers to grow more food on less land, raising yield. 

According to a 2005 study by CropLife Foundation, without fungicides in the US, fruit and vegetable yields would decrease by 50-90%. For perspective, 40.3% of Canada’s fruit is imported from the US. This is similarly the case in Mexico, South Korea, and Japan, all countries with high populations. Without pesticides, these countries would experience significant food shortages due to their reliance on the US and their pesticides. 

 

The Killer That Could Save Your Life: Snake Venom

Snakes are a root of fear for many people due to the dangerous venom they produce. Around 5.4 million people are bitten by snakes each year, 2.7 million of which are envenomings. Of these, up to 180 thousand cause death, and three times as many result in amputations or permanent disabilities. However, snake venom may also save your life. Snake venom has been used to treat a variety of conditions since the 1930s, including cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, and strokes.

Snake venom contains a variety of compounds, including a variety of powerful enzymatic and non-enzymatic peptides. Enzymes are biological catalysts used to promote the reaction of chemical compounds. Enzymes found in snake venom have a variety of applications, from antiviral and antibacterial properties. Further, several non-enzymatic peptides, such as 3FTxs and disintegrin, found in snake venom have been used as therapeutic agents for HIV, muscular dystrophy, cancer, and a variety of other ailments.

Tertiary structure of 3FTx non-enzymatic protein. Source

 

 

3FTxs, or Three-Finger Toxins, are a large group of non-enzymatic peptides found in venom that have been widely studied. Their identifiable structure appears due to the presence of several disulfide bonds in the molecule. The wide variety of these neurotoxins and the breadth of their family allow them to have a wide variety of uses, and their prevalence in venom among several snake species made them very researchable. 3FTxs have been used to treat drug-resistant HIV strains, multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy and other debilitating conditions.

 

 

However, snake venom comes at a cost, and an expensive one. Snake venom samples can cost anywhere from 250-4000$ per gram. These prices are in great part due to the immense difficulty in extracting snake venom. Snake venom extraction is done through a process called milking, a dangerous and tedious job, during which milkers run the risk of being bitten. Further to maintain the snake’s health, only small quantities of venom can be extracted at a time, with milkings occurring about every 30-60 days. This maintains the high price, making many therapeutics inaccessible to the general public.

Snake milking venom extraction. Source

 

Not only is venom extraction dangerous, but it also comes at a cost to the animal. Often snakes are kept in plastic bins stacked in rows in facilities, kept for extraction of venom. Groups have argued against the ethics of this, as the snake’s lifetime is significantly decreased by this treatment. Synthetic production of snake venom is an evolving field in recent years but has yet to be a more affordable and energy-efficient alternative to snake venom usage.

 

The importance of snake venom in the production of therapeutic agents cannot be underestimated, however, the mal-treatment of the animals, even if they frighten us, is an important consideration in the development of these life-saving products, particularly if those products are only accessible to people with enough money to cover the cost.

 

~Tristan Ruigrok

 

Nuclear Power: A Solution to the Australian Energy Crisis or a Risky Gamble?

Australia is currently in the midst of an energy crisis. Electricity prices have risen significantly as coal-fired power plants around the country are shutting down, lowering electricity supply in a time where demand is skyrocketing.

As Australia is exploring new ways to generate clean and efficient electricity, one possible, yet controversial alternative have been proposed: nuclear power.

Nuclear power generates electricity by splitting radioactive isotopes, such as uranium-238, in a process called nuclear fission. The heat produced from this process is then used to heat water, which turns into steam and spins turbines to generates electricity.

Nuclear power plant. Source

Proponents of nuclear power argue that nuclear power is a clean and efficient energy source. Unlike fossil fuels, nuclear power generates little to no greenhouse gases. This makes nuclear energy a viable option for combating climate change and can help lower carbon emissions in Australia, allowing the country to meet its emission goals.

Another advantage of nuclear power is its reliability. Nuclear power plants are reliable because they can provide a consistent and reliable source of electricity as nuclear power plants require less maintenance and are designed to operate for long periods before refueling. This is in contrast to renewable energy sources such as wind or solar, which are less reliable as they are dependent on fuel availability (wind and sunlight) and require large-scale storage.

Despite the benefits of nuclear power, there are opponents who raise concerns about its safety. One reason behind this opposition is the potential for accidents. Nuclear meltdowns such as Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi have resulted in radioactive leaks and serious health risks for people living nearby. In fact, the areas surrounding these accidents sites have been left uninhabitable for the foreseeable future.

Damage to the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant following the 2011 earthquake and tsunami. Source.

Another risk associated with nuclear power is the issue of nuclear waste. Nuclear power plants generate radioactive waste that can remain hazardous for thousands of years.

Radioactive waste generated from nuclear power plants poses a risk of environmental contamination, causing harm to people, animals, and the ecosystem. This waste needs to be carefully stored and disposed of to prevent contaminating the environment.

The debate over nuclear power is likely to continue for many years to come. While there are certainly benefits to nuclear power, it is also clear that there are associated risks. As Australia faces the current energy crisis, it should consider nuclear power as a viable option for generating electricity to overcome this crisis.

~ Raymond Tang

MSG: A Story of how Bad Science Led to a Bad Reputation

Many North Americans believe that MSG causes headache, nausea, drowsiness, obesity and even heart disease.

In a recent poll MSG was found to rank highly among ingredients that American consumers avoid for health reasons.

Data from the International Food Information Council (2018). Figure adapted from (source).

So, what is MSG? and why are people afraid of it?

Crystalline MSG (source).

MSG is short for monosodium glutamate. It is one of the most widely used flavour enhancers. When added to food it provides a delicious umami flavour.

Glutamate is one of the most naturally abundant proteinogenic amino acids. It is naturally found in protein containing food. MSG is simply the sodium salt of glutamate.

MSG was isolated by Japanese biochemist Kikunae Ikeda from seaweed in 1908. Since then, it has been a flavouring additive is common in many foods.

Some are biased to assuming that MSG is only common in Asian cuisines. However, one should note MSG is far more versatile. Added to most bagged potato chips, fast foods, taco seasonings, and soups.

The negative view came from a 1968 study which dubbed MSG the cause of “Chinese restaurant Syndrome”. A condition said to cause headaches, sweat, and abdominal pain.

The name alone is targeting Chinese food without warrant to do so. The use of and naturally occurrence of MSG is far more widespread.
It has been understood more recently that this study and belief carry racist biases against Asian cuisine. As the poor choice of name may suggest this study was not carried out in a scientifically rigorous manner.

The study lacked proper controls, people in the study were aware of what sample they were ingesting and were asked to describe their symptoms.

Studies that have continued in this path of villainizing MSG suffer the similar issues. Poor sample size, doses significantly higher than regular consumption, and biased participants.

But, in blind studies the vast majority of people, even those who claim to be sensitive do not negatively react to MSG. Not one study has found a verified mechanism of MSG causing harm.

But, as mentioned in the poll a 4/10 Americans hold some of these beliefs and avoid MSG.

In spite of science, prejudice can be hard to overcome. If you catch someone saying they avoid MSG, I encourage you to see if they can explain why.

Gun Control: Saving Lives or Infringing on Rights? The Contentious Debate Continues…

The contentious issue of gun control has sparked much debate within society. Some contend that gun control is vital for ensuring the safety and protection of individuals. Others argue that it infringes on the fundamental right to live and can actually increase the number of firearm-related deaths. This article aims to explore both perspectives and shed light on the underlying reasoning behind each.

Proponents of gun control argue that it is necessary for reducing the number of gun-related deaths and injuries. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were approximately 43,000 firearm-related deaths in the United States in 2020 alone. They argue regulating the availability and ownership of firearms can reduce these numbers. They suggest measures such as background checks, waiting periods, and restrictions on certain types of firearms. This would ensure only responsible and law-abiding citizens have access to them. They also state that not having gun control violates the most fundamental human right, the right to live! 

Opponents of gun control, however, argue that it violates the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, which guarantees the right to bear arms. They view the right to own firearms as a fundamental aspect of individual liberty and personal freedom. Some view the regulation of firearms as a potential threat to individual liberties and fear that it could lead to a loss of autonomy and control over one’s own safety. Carrying a firearm can serve as a means of self-defense, they argue. They suggest that gun control measures will not effectively reduce gun-related deaths and injuries since criminals will still find ways to obtain firearms regardless of regulations. 

Another argument against gun control is that it may be used by the government to oppress and disarm its citizens. This would make it easier for the government to maintain control over the population.On the other hand, advocates of gun control argue that the safety and protection of individuals outweighs the individual right to bear arms. They suggest that by implementing stricter gun control measures, society as a whole can be made safer. They also argue that the Second Amendment was written at a time when firearms were far less dangerous and sophisticated than they are today. Their interpretation should evolve along with modern technology.

In conclusion, the issue of gun control is complex and multifaceted, with valid arguments on both sides. While proponents of gun control argue that it is necessary for the safety and protection of individuals, opponents view it as a violation of human rights. Ultimately, the solution to this issue may lie in finding a middle ground where individuals’ rights are protected, while measures are taken to ensure the safety and security of society as a whole.

Environmental Hazard to Reusable Material: Converting Plastics and CO2 into Fuel

Plastic waste management has become a serious issue over the last few decades. In 2019, the total amount of plastic produced since 1950 totaled just over 9.5 billion tons, and plastic production hasn’t slowed down, as 400 million tons were added to that in 2020.

The chemical bonds that make up plastics are hard to break and do not degrade in the environment quickly. This makes plastic waste challenging to deal with, leading to a large amount of plastic being discarded or incinerated.

While people have been recycling since the late 1980s, only about 6% of annual waste is recycled, and only a further 20% of that stays recycled.  Current recycling methods consist of mechanical recycling, a process by which the plastic is ground or melted down into a new product, or chemical recycling, a process by which chemical additives break down the plastic into more manageable pieces to be used as raw material. However, both methods are not environmentally friendly or cheap, leading to a high volume of plastics that are not recycled (see below).

The final fate of plastics over 65 years. only 1.72% of plastics remain recycled.

Finding new ways to deal with plastic waste is a heavy focus for environmental scientists, leading to catalysis, electrochemistry, and photochemistry developments. One such method, developed by Dr. Resier and his team at the University of Cambridge, has found a way to deal with this waste in an environmentally clean way. Using a perovskite (PVK) based photocathode and a copper-palladium alloy anode in combination with a CO2 reduction catalyst, they transformed PET plastics and CO2 into a variety of useable fuels and by-products, such as carbon monoxide, hydrogen gas, and glycolic acid.

Electrochemical pathway of CO2 reduction into CO and byproducts.

The photoelectrochemical system works upon sunlight exposure under zero applied voltage and generates products 10-100 times faster than other catalytic methods. Further, the catalyst system is not sensitive to the introduction of bio-organic molecules; in fact, the presence of small amounts of food products could increase the activity of the system.

However, this process is anything but cheap. The copper-palladium alloy anode is not cheap to fabricate, and the materials required are rare, palladium being over 15 times rarer than platinum. This increases startup costs, which is not favorable to most companies who could instead dump the waste.

While advancements in this technology are still needed, there is a positive outlook for the future of plastics and environmental contaminants. We may yet be able to save our fragile, yet vital planet from our own advancement.

 

Tristan Ruigrok

The lingering effects of Pandemic Screen time: a result of parental stress

Children’s screen time increased by 65% during the COVID-19 Pandemic and hasn’t changed since.

Unsplash Photo by @emily_wade (Child, Technology) Unsplash

In 2019 Dr. Henderson and her team at Permanente Californian Research Center began a longitudinal study on 228 children aged 4-12 across the United States. From July 2019 to August 2021, they found that prepandemic mean screen time increased by 1.75 hours per day after Dec 2020, and 1.11 hours per day after May 2021.

During the pandemic, with school and daycare closures, many parents and families were under tremendous amounts of social, emotional, and financial stress. Occupying kids with technology reduced parents’ stresses around having to constantly stimulate their children.

Researchers point out that screen time increased because children were spending more time at home instead of doing extracurricular outside and because schools transitioned online. 

The graphic below illustrates Dr. Henderson’s findings, showing a clear increase in educational, recreational, and total mean screen time.

Longitudinal 228-child cohort study (ages 4-12) from July 2019 to August 2021 in the USA. Measuring Prepandemic (July 2019-Mar.2020), First Pandemic Period (Dec. 2020-Apr. 2021), and Second Pandemic Periods (May 2021-Aug 2021), and their Educational, Recreational, and Total Mean screen times. JAMANetwork 

The long-term effects of high-screen time in children are still relatively unknown, but given that socializing and exercising are fundamental for healthy brain development in children, the pandemic undoubtedly has affected a generation of kids and youth.

More recently, in 2022, ABC news interviewed Dr. Heather Berlin, Neuroscientist and Clinical Psychologist at New York University, about the harmful effects of high-screen time.

“Consequences for kids’ of endless screen time” A 2022 ABC News interview with Dr. Heather Berlin, Neuroscientist and Clinical Psychologist at New York University. Youtube

While a lot is still unknown about screen time and how it affects children, the COVID-19 Pandemic gave impetus to necessary research at an unprecedented time in history. Research that could prevent further effects in the future and potential recurrence.

Missing Capsule of Cesium-137 Sparks Manhunt in Western Australia

Authorities in Western Australia have quite literally found a radioactive needle in a haystack.

Carrying case for radioactive capsules. Source.

On January 12th, a tiny capsule of radioactive cesium-137 from a radiation gauge fell off a transport truck that was on its way from a Rio Tinto mine site to a storage facility in Perth, Western Australia, along a 1400 km stretch of highway in the rural Australian outback.

Due to the radioactive nature of cesium-137, Australia’s Department of Fire and Emergency Services, as well as nuclear scientists quickly launched a desperate search for the tiny capsule, about 8 mm in length. As the search intensified, the public was warned to say at least 5 meters from the radioactive capsule.

Figure 1: The bar chart compares the size of cesium-137 to the size of commonly used Australian coins.

Cesium-137 is a radioactive isotope that is formed from the nuclear fission of uranium-235. Although it is tiny, cesium-137 is very dangerous to the health and wellbeing of anyone who come in contact with it. The radioactive isotope can emit both beta and gamma rays, which can penetrate skin, causing severe radiation burns, sickness, or even death.

Capsule of cesium-137. Source.

With a half-life of about 30.05 years before decaying to barium-137m, a stable and non-radioactive isotope. However, “the cesium inside the capsule will [still] be dangerous [until] the next century.” That is according to Edward Obbard, a nuclear materials engineer with the University of New South Wales.

Miraculously, on February 1st, the radioactive capsule of cesium-137 was found just off the side of the highway around 200 km from the mining site. Authorities quickly cordoned off a 20 meter perimeter and safely contained the capsule inside a lead container.

It is important for companies to be extremely careful when transporting radioactive substances. This incident highlights the need to scrutinize the transport of radioactive substances so that a similar incident will not happen again in the future.

Raymond Tang