The Pandemic Did Not Affect The Moon After All, Scientists Say
Here's the original hypothesis from last year: As businesses closed their doors in 2020 and we all spent more time at home, carbon emissions dropped and there was a drop in terrestrial radiation – the heat being generated by our planet, and taken up by the Moon.
Previous research has raised the question of terrestrial radiation influencing lunar surface temperatures – and indeed there was an observed drop in Moon nighttime temperatures across April and May 2020, when many lockdowns were in force.
In the latest study, researchers from the Missouri University of Science and Technology (Missouri S&T) and the University of West Indies (UWI) wanted to take a closer look at the data – and found some problems with the link between COVID-19 and lunar temperatures.
"The idea that our activity, or lack of activity, on Earth would have significant influence on the temperatures of the Moon – which is almost 240,000 miles from us – didn't seem likely, but we decided to keep an open mind and conduct additional research," says civil engineer William Schonberg from Missouri S&T.
Looking at the data, the researchers found some problems with the original hypothesis. First, there was a dip in lunar temperatures in 2018 similar to the one in 2020, and a steady decline from 2019 – which doesn't quite fit in with the timing of the pandemic and its lockdowns.
In fact, the temperature readings gathered by NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter suggest cyclical fluctuations rather than one distinct dip, according to the updated analysis. The researchers also point to a 2021 study which found that any emissions reduction linked to COVID-19 only affected the lower parts of Earth's atmosphere.
"We're not disputing that the temperatures did go down at different times during the time frame studied, but it seems to be a bit of a stretch to state with any certainty that human activity was the primary cause of this," says Schonberg.
The researchers behind the new study also raise the possibility that fewer pollutants and a clearer night sky would actually increase the heat being reflected back from Earth to the Moon – potentially raising rather than reducing lunar temperatures.
There are of course a multitude of factors at play here, but the conclusion of the new study is that shifts in human activity are unlikely to have an impact on the temperatures on the Moon – during COVID-19 or any other period.
"During the Moon's nighttime, there is a small possibility that heat and radiation from Earth might have a very small effect on the lunar surface temperatures," says Schonberg.
"But this influence would probably be so minimal that it would be difficult to measure or even notice."
The research has been published in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters.
Scientists Simulated Bennu Crashing to Earth in September 2182. It's Not Pretty.
At 1.3 Billion Light-Years Wide, Quipu Is Officially The Biggest Thing in The Universe
Hubble Reveals Cosmic Bullet That Gave The Bullseye Galaxy Its Record-Breaking Rings
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Epoch Times
an hour ago
- Epoch Times
COVID-19 Vaccine Recipients More Likely to Suffer Respiratory Illness: Study
People who have received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine were found by researchers to have greater odds of suffering from respiratory illness. Vaccinated people were more likely to have one or more episodes of influenza-like respiratory illness or experience fever and a respiratory symptom, such as cough or sore throat, researchers said in a study published on Aug. 9 by Nature Communications Medicine.
Politico
19 hours ago
- Politico
Bhattacharya and Kennedy split on mRNA cuts
AROUND THE AGENCIES National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya is making the case that mRNA vaccine technology is 'promising, but not yet ready for prime time.' He cites a lack of public trust in the technology as the reason his boss, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.,recently canceled $500 million in mRNA vaccine development projects. Bhattacharya weighed in on Kennedy's decision in a conversation over the weekend with Steve Bannon, the longtime Trump ally and prominent MAGA figure, on Bannon's 'War Room' podcast: 'The reason that he did that — and I think it's very important for people to understand — as far as public health goes for vaccines, the mRNA platform is no longer viable,' Bhattacharya said. 'You can't have a platform where such a large fraction of the population distrusts the platform, if you're going to use it for vaccines, and expect it to work.' But, but, but: Kennedy, who has long been suspicious of the mRNA vaccine platform, offered an explanation for the funding cuts that contradicts Bhattacharya's reasoning. 'After reviewing the science and consulting top experts at NIH and FDA, HHS has determined that mRNA technology poses more risk than benefits for these respiratory viruses,' Kennedy said in a video posted on social media last week, referring to Covid-19 and flu mRNA vaccines. Big picture: Scientists and drugmakers worry that Kennedy's skepticism of mRNA could stifle cancer treatment developments, our Lauren Gardner reports. mRNA technology can instruct the immune system to attack problem proteins, so it holds promise as a customized treatment for rare cancers and diseases. As such, dozens of mRNA therapies are being studied or are in the drug-development pipeline. Bhattacharya seemed aware of the technology's use beyond flu and Covid vaccines. After telling Bannon that mRNA technology wasn't ready for widespread vaccine use, he added: 'For cancer, maybe it's another story.' WELCOME TO FUTURE PULSE This is where we explore the ideas and innovators shaping health care. A swarm of jellyfish shut down reactors at a French nuclear power station, Ketrin Jochecová, our POLITICO colleague in Europe, reports. Share any thoughts, news, tips and feedback with Ruth Reader at rreader@ or Erin Schumaker at eschumaker@ Want to share a tip securely? Message us on Signal: RuthReader.02 or ErinSchumaker.01. OPERATING ROOM A large-scale study of New York's Mount Sinai Health System suggests that artificial intelligence could help emergency departments better handle their patient loads. In the study, researchers from Mount Sinai trained an AI model on 1.8 million emergency department visits between January 2019 and December 2023. Then they tested the model by comparing it with two months' worth of nurse triage assessments of nearly 50,000 patient visits across the system's urban and suburban hospitals. The result: Nurse predictions were 81.6 percent accurate, while the AI model's assessments were 85.4 percent accurate. The study, published in the journal Mayo Clinic Proceedings: Digital Health in July, had a few limitations, the authors noted, including that the research was conducted at a single health system over a short time span. Outcomes might differ in another setting, and longer-term trends could yield different results. Bird's eye view: 'The strength of this approach is its ability to turn complex data into timely, actionable insights for clinical teams — freeing them up to focus less on logistics and more on delivering the personal, compassionate care that only humans can provide,' Dr. Eyal Klang, study co-author and director of the Generative AI Research Program at Mount Sinai, said in a statement.
Los Angeles Times
a day ago
- Los Angeles Times
RFK Jr.'s cancellation of mRNA vaccine research is even worse than it first seemed
On first glance, the data that Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. cited to justify canceling some $500 million in federal grants for mRNA vaccine research looked impressive. The data, according to the agency, were embodied in some 400 research papers listed in a compilation that ran to 181 pages. The document was headlined 'COVID-19 mRNA 'vaccine' harms research collection.' 'After reviewing the science and consulting top experts at NIH and FDA,' Kennedy said on a video posted on X, referring to the National Institutes of Health and the Food and Drug Administration, 'HHS has determined that mRNA technology poses more risk than benefits' for respiratory viruses such as COVID-19 and flu. 'We reviewed the science, listened to the experts, and acted,' he wrote in an accompanying post. Is that so? A close look at the so-called data reveals that the vast majority of the cited papers — all but about 40 — have little or nothing to do with the vaccines. They concern the consequences of COVID-19 infection, not the shots. Many of the papers that do reference the vaccines are studies not of human subjects, but laboratory mice; in some of these studies the mice received the vaccines via injections directly into the brain or intravenously, which is not how people receive the vaccines. What's also important is the lack of evidence supporting the agency's claims. The data packet fails to include well-researched studies attesting to the safety and efficacy of the mRNA vaccines, including some published very recently. Among those is an exhaustive study by Danish researchers of more than 1 million recipients of the latest mRNA COVID booster, published July 28. That study investigated the incidence of 29 potential adverse side effects from the vaccine, including heart, liver and kidney failure; neurological conditions; diabetes; and arthritis. It found 'no statistically significant risk' of any of them from the vaccine. That includes myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle that is often cited by anti-vaccine agitators as a dangerous side effect of the mRNA vaccines. That condition was most commonly seen among young men, particularly if they had received two shots within a short time span. But for the most part it was mild and short-term; once the booster was reformulated after 2022, the effect appeared to disappear. No deaths from the condition were known to have occurred, and myocarditis effects were more common and serious among unvaccinated people infected with COVID. Nor did the agency's data packet include an estimate of lives saved by the COVID vaccines, led by Stanford epidemiologist John P.A. Ioannidis and published July 25. That study calculated that from the beginning of the global vaccination campaign in 2020 through September 2024 as many as 4 million lives were saved by the vaccines. Ioannidis acknowledged that his estimate is 'conservative.' Indeed, in 2022 the Commonwealth Fund estimated that in just the first two years the vaccines were available, the shots prevented more than 18 million hospitalizations and more than 3 million COVID-related deaths in the U.S. alone. A 2022 study in The Lancet, a British medical journal, estimated as many as 20 million COVID-related lives saved around the world in just the first year of vaccination. Weigh those figures against Kennedy's assertion that the mRNA vaccines pose 'more risks than benefits,' and it becomes evident that decision-making has gone seriously awry at the Department of Health and Human Services under Kennedy's leadership. To Jake Scott, an infectious disease expert at Stanford Medical School who painstakingly examined the agency's data citations, they point to 'textbook confirmation bias'—the quest for information that confirms someone's preexisting beliefs. In this case, that someone is Kennedy, whose record of anti-vaccine advocacy is indisputable. The mismatch between the data packet cited by Kennedy and the established facts of the vaccines' safety and efficacy explain why Kennedy's cancellation of 22 contracts supporting mRNA vaccine research has been greeted by experts as a senseless and devastating blow against science and public health. 'I have have been in this business for over 50 years on the front lines of public health,...and I can say unequivocally that this was the most dangerous public health decision I have ever seen made by a government body,' Michael Osterholm, an expert in infectious diseases at the University of Minnesota, told PBS. At the very least, if Kennedy is so convinced that the effects mRNA vaccines are not sufficiently well-understood, the solution is more research, not less. I asked Kennedy's department to respond to criticism of his decision, but received no response. A few words about the mRNA technology. Using messenger RNA as an intermediary in their actions, the vaccines instruct the body how to manufacture parts of a pathogen that its immune system can recognize and fight. For immunologists, the virtues of the new technology are manifest. Vaccines to combat new pathogens or new versions of existing pathogens can be engineered quickly, allowing them to be rolled out to stifle pandemics before they even emerge. The potential utility of mRNA vaccines is unprecedentedly broad. The possible targets under study today — including in some of the research contracts Kennedy cancelled — include flu, HIV, hepatitis C, malaria, tuberculosis, and cancer, Drew Weissman of the University of Pennsylvania and other scientists told Nature in 2021. Weissman shared the Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine with Katalin Karikó in 2023 for their work on mRNA vaccines. In the U.S., the development of the mRNA COVID vaccine was sponsored by $2.5 billion in grants and purchase guarantees from the federal government to Moderna, one of the two drugmakers that brought out the COVID vaccines, partially through Operation Warp Speed, an R&D effort under the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, or BARDA. That's the agency that Kennedy has ordered to cancel the mRNA contracts. President Trump bragged about the achievement during his first term, but reversed course after the vaccines became the target of fearmongering from the right-wing and the anti-vaccine camp. Kennedy's video on X explaining his decision was replete with fundamental misconceptions about the vaccines, according to scientists and real-world data. 'As the pandemic showed us, mRNA vaccines don't perform well against viruses that infect the upper respiratory tract,' he said. But that's plainly contradicted by the record of lives saved and hospitalizations averted. Statistics published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which falls under Kennedy's jurisdiction, show that the average weekly COVID case rate in late 2020 was 347.8 per 100,000 population among the unvaccinated, but 25 per 100,000 among the fully vaccinated and boosted population. The weekly average death rate in the same period was 7.8 among the unvaccinated and 0.1 among the vaccinated. He claimed that the vaccines promote the mutation of COVID; 'one mutation, and the vaccine becomes ineffective,' Kennedy said. Neither of those statements is supported by science. 'MRNA vaccines do not cause the virus to mutate — they do that all on their own,' writes Steven Novella, a neurologist and veteran misinformation debunker. 'What causes new variants to arise more quickly is allowing a virus to spread uninhibited throughout a population — the more it replicates, the more opportunities there are for new mutations. Widespread vaccination therefore decreases new mutations and variants.' Moreover, no 'one mutation' causes the vaccines to become ineffective; as vaccinologist Peter Hotez observes, in no known case has a single mutation rendered the vaccine ineffective. Boosters developed for COVID variants have remained relatively effective even as new variants become dominant. Anyway, the virtue of mRNA technology is that the vaccine can be rapidly retooled to meet the challenge of new variants. That brings us to the data package Kennedy's agency offered to defend his decision. It's not the product of U.S. government scientists, although one of its developers, Steven Hatfill, is currently on the HHS staff. Its other chief compilers are identified as Martin Wucher, a dentist ; Byram Bridle, a faculty member at a Canadian veterinary college; and Erik Sass, a nonfiction author. I reached out to all three for comment but received no reply. The compilation originated as material for a book titled 'TOXIC SHOT: Facing the Dangers of the COVID 'Vaccines',' an anthology of essays by prominent anti-vaxxers. The compilation doesn't make the case for canceling the research. A paper listed as support for the myocarditis threat, for example, states, 'no causality can be assumed or established' linking the condition to the vaccine because of the lack of a control group for comparison. 'There is no direct evidence of a vaccine-induced inflammatory response' to the vaccine. Kennedy's action is almost certain to hamstring American science for years, possibly decades, to come. It's the antithesis of Trump's claim to put 'America First,' for it cedes the development of a life-saving medical technology to Europe and China. And it's not limited to the development of vaccines for respiratory diseases. During a recent appearance on a podcast hosted by the right-wing influencer Steve Bannon, the newly-appointed commissioner of the National Institutes of Health, Jay Bhattacharya, declared, 'As far as public health goes for vaccines, the mRNA platform is no longer viable.' Bhattacharya justified this statement by noting a rise in public skepticism about mRNA technology. What he didn't say was that the skepticism was promoted by Kennedy and other anti-vaxxers denigrating the technology; a competent and responsible NIH chief would be defending a technological innovation, not magnifying disinformation about it. The truth is that the mRNA platform is likely to be seen in retrospect as a historic advance in healthcare ... everywhere but in the United States.
