Never before seen asteroids discovered in the Solar System
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
16 hours ago
- ABC News
More than 14 million people could die from US foreign aid cuts, study finds
More than 14 million of the world's most vulnerable people, a third of them small children, could die because of Donald Trump administration's dismantling of US foreign aid, research has projected. The study in the prestigious Lancet journal was published on Tuesday as world and business leaders gather for a UN conference in Spain this week hoping to bolster the reeling aid sector. The US Agency for International Development (USAID) had provided over 40 per cent of global humanitarian funding until Mr Trump returned to the White House in January. Two weeks later, Mr Trump's then-close advisor, Elon Musk, boasted of having put the agency "through the woodchipper". The funding cuts "risk abruptly halting, and even reversing, two decades of progress in health among vulnerable populations," warned study co-author Davide Rasella, a researcher at the Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal). "For many low- and middle-income countries, the resulting shock would be comparable in scale to a global pandemic or a major armed conflict," he said in a statement. Looking back over data from 133 nations, the international team of researchers estimated that USAID funding had prevented 91 million deaths in developing countries between 2001 and 2021. They also used modelling to project how funding being slashed by 83 per cent — the figure announced by the United States government earlier this year — could affect death rates. The cuts could lead to more than 14 million avoidable deaths by 2030, the projections found. That number included over 4.5 million children under the age of five — or about 700,000 child deaths a year. For comparison, about 10 million soldiers are estimated to have been killed during World War I. Programmes supported by USAID were linked to a 15 per cent decrease in deaths from all causes, the researchers found. For children under five, the drop in deaths was twice as steep at 32 per cent. USAID funding was found to be particularly effective at staving off preventable deaths from disease. There were 65 per cent fewer deaths from HIV/AIDS in countries receiving a high level of support compared to those with little or no USAID funding, the study found. Deaths from malaria and neglected tropical diseases were similarly cut in half. After USAID was gutted, several other major donors including Germany, the UK and France followed suit in announcing plans to slash their foreign aid budgets. These aid reductions, particularly in the European Union, could lead to "even more additional deaths in the coming years," study co-author Caterina Monti of ISGlobal said. But the grim projections for deaths were based on the current amount of pledged aid. Researchers emphasised this could rapidly come down if the situation changes. Dozens of world leaders are meeting in the Spanish city of Seville this week for the biggest aid conference in a decade. The US, however, will not attend. "Now is the time to scale up, not scale back," Professor Rasella said. Before its funding was slashed, USAID represented 0.3 per cent of all US federal spending. "US citizens contribute about 17 cents per day to USAID, around $64 per year," said study co-author James Macinko of the University of California, Los Angeles. "I think most people would support continued USAID funding if they knew just how effective such a small contribution can be to saving millions of lives." AFP
ABC News
3 days ago
- ABC News
Antarctic scientists analyse first samples from 'Million Year Ice Core' project
Inside an ice-cold laboratory in Hobart, where the temperature is almost 20 degrees Celsius below zero, scientists in thick puffer jackets begin their work. Wearing gloves, they carefully pull out a one-metre cylinder of ice from an insulated box that recently arrived from Antarctica. "In the freezer lab today, we're cutting the first samples from the 'Million Year Ice Core'," Dr Joel Pedro explained. For almost a decade, the paleoclimatologist and a team from the Australian Antarctic Program have been planning an ambitious project. Known as the 'Million Year Ice Core', the aim is to extract the world's oldest, continuous core of ice from deep beneath the frozen continent. "More than any other archive of climate in the past, [ice cores have] a range of information that helps you to understand the changes in the total climate system," Dr Pedro said. In other words, ice cores are like time capsules that allow scientists to get a clear picture of the Earth's climate and atmospheric history. That's because they contain tiny bubbles of air trapped over thousands, and even millions of years, depending on the depth of the ice. The ice that's being analysed in the Hobart laboratory comes from a depth of 150 metres, making it almost 4,000 years old. While it's a significant milestone, it's only the start of a much bigger mission. Over the coming years, the team hopes to reach a depth of 3,000m. If successful, it will be the oldest ice ever recovered. Getting to this point has been a mammoth logistical undertaking. The drill site, known as Dome C North, is 1,200 kilometres from the nearest Australian station in Antarctica. It's also 3,000m above sea level, where the temperature can fall below minus-50 degrees Celsius. Turning the site into a deep field station involved a 10-person team using six tractors to haul almost 600 tonnes of gear across the frozen landscape. "In the Australian program, it's the biggest traverse that we've undertaken," traverse leader Chris Gallagher, from the AAD, said. After enduring multiple blizzards, the team eventually made it to Dome C North 18 days after setting off from Casey Station. "It's a very specialised team that has extremely high skills, but also that ability to really get on with each other and care for each other," Mr Gallagher said. Once the accommodation modules and drill shelter were set up, a separate team of scientists flew in to begin drilling and processing the ice core. Chelsea Long, a field assistant, said the extraction of the first section of ice was a momentous occasion. "It was really celebratory when it came out and just finally to see this happening and to touch the ice and measure it, was a real joy," she said. For Dr Pedro, it was a moment to savour after many years of hard work, as well as delays caused by the COVID pandemic. "The start to the project was easily the most exciting thing that's happened in my science career," he said. "But at the same time, it's just the start of the project — we've [still] got 3 kilometres to go." Currently, the oldest ice core on record dates back almost 800,000 years. But a European team, known as Beyond EPICA, recently extracted ice from a depth of 2,800m, which is expected to date back almost 1.2 million years. The Australian team plans to drill more than 200m deeper than Beyond EPICA, which Dr Pedro said could date back up to 2 million years. "If we can get this record − and the modelling suggests [Dome C North] is the best site in Antarctica for recovering [the] oldest ice − then we'll produce data that will stand for decades as the measurement of Earth's atmosphere [and] greenhouse gas levels through that period." If successful, that data would help scientists better understand why the Earth's ice ages became much longer about a million years ago. "It remains one of the biggest puzzles, [or] challenges, in ice core science and in climate science to resolve what the cause of that was, and, in particular, what the role of C02 [carbon dioxide] was in that." Data from the 'Million Year Ice Core' could also improve the accuracy of climate change forecasts. The team plans to resume drilling during the 2025/26 summer and expect to reach the 3,000m-mark in 2028/29.
ABC News
4 days ago
- ABC News
Can 'biological clock' tests tell you anything worthwhile?
We all like to imagine we're ageing well. Now a simple blood or saliva test promises to tell us by measuring our "biological age". And then, as many have done, we can share how "young" we really are on social media, along with our secrets to success. While chronological age is how long you have been alive, measures of biological age aim to indicate how old your body actually is, purporting to measure "wear and tear" at a molecular level. The appeal of these tests is undeniable. Health-conscious consumers may see their results as reinforcing their anti-ageing efforts, or a way to show their journey to better health is paying off. But how good are these tests? Do they actually offer useful insights? Or are they just clever marketing dressed up to look like science? Over time, the chemical processes that allow our body to function, known as our "metabolic activity", lead to damage and a decline in the activity of our cells, tissues and organs. Biological age tests aim to capture some of these changes, offering a snapshot of how well, or how poorly, we are ageing on a cellular level. Our DNA is also affected by the ageing process. In particular, chemical tags (methyl groups) attach to our DNA and affect gene expression. These changes occur in predictable ways with age and environmental exposures, in a process called methylation. Research studies have used "epigenetic clocks", which measure the methylation of our genes, to estimate biological age. By analysing methylation levels at specific sites in the genome from participant samples, researchers apply predictive models to estimate the cumulative wear and tear on the body. Although the science is rapidly evolving, the evidence underpinning the use of epigenetic clocks to measure biological ageing in research studies is strong. Studies have shown epigenetic biological age estimation is a better predictor of the risk of death and ageing-related diseases than chronological age. Epigenetic clocks also have been found to correlate strongly with lifestyle and environmental exposures, such as smoking status and diet quality. In addition, they have been found to be able to predict the risk of conditions such as cardiovascular disease, which can lead to heart attacks and strokes. Taken together, a growing body of research indicates that at a population level, epigenetic clocks are robust measures of biological ageing and are strongly linked to the risk of disease and death. While these tests are valuable when studying populations in research settings, using epigenetic clocks to measure the biological age of individuals is a different matter and requires scrutiny. For testing at an individual level, perhaps the most important consideration is the "signal to noise ratio" (or precision) of these tests. This is the question of whether a single sample from an individual may yield widely differing results. A study from 2022 found samples deviated by up to nine years. So an identical sample from a 40-year-old may indicate a biological age of as low as 35 years (a cause for celebration) or as high as 44 years (a cause of anxiety). While there have been significant improvements in these tests over the years, there is considerable variability in the precision of these tests between commercial providers. So depending on who you send your sample to, your estimated biological age may vary considerably. Another limitation is there is currently no standardisation of methods for this testing. Commercial providers perform these tests in different ways and have different algorithms for estimating biological age from the data. As you would expect for commercial operators, providers don't disclose their methods. So it's difficult to compare companies and determine who provides the most accurate results — and what you're getting for your money. A third limitation is that while epigenetic clocks correlate well with ageing, they are simply a "proxy" and are not a diagnostic tool. In other words, they may provide a general indication of ageing at a cellular level. But they don't offer any specific insights about what the issue may be if someone is found to be "ageing faster" than they would like, or what they're doing right if they are "ageing well". So regardless of the result of your test, all you're likely to get from the commercial provider of an epigenetic test is generic advice about what the science says is healthy behaviour. While companies offering these tests may have good intentions, remember their ultimate goal is to sell you these tests and make a profit. And at a cost of around $500, they're not cheap. While the idea of using these tests as a personalised health tool has potential, it is clear that we are not there yet. For this to become a reality, tests will need to become more reproducible, standardised across providers, and validated through long-term studies that link changes in biological age to specific behaviours. So while one-off tests of biological age make for impressive social media posts, for most people they represent a significant cost and offer limited real value. The good news is we already know what we need to do to increase our chances of living longer and healthier lives. These include: We don't need to know our biological age in order to implement changes in our lives right now to improve our health. Hassan Vally is an associate professor of epidemiology at Deakin University. This piece first appeared on The Conversation.
