Lost Loch Ness Monster camera from 1970 accidentally found by Boaty McBoatface
An underwater camera from 1970 that had been submerged to capture evidence of the
Loch Ness Monster
has been discovered by accident.
The U.K.'s National Oceanography Centre was conducting a routine test of one of their autonomous underwater vehicles, named
Boaty McBoatface
, when it happened upon the camera system at a depth of around 590 feet.
The camera is thought to have been submerged 55 years ago as part of the Loch Ness Investigation Bureau's first attempt to use underwater photography in their
search for Nessie
.
The center's underwater robot came across the contraption when part of its mooring snagged on Boaty McBoatface's propeller. When it was brought back to the surface, author and lifelong Nessie investigator Adrian Shine said he knew exactly what it was.
"It was a fascinating moment," Shine told CBS News.
He described the camera trap as "quite ingenious." "[It was] triggered by a bait line, which was above the camera on a float, and if that was pulled, an external magnetic switch was operated," he said.
Shine, who set up The Loch Ness Project in the mid-1970s to investigate Loch Ness, said around 24 film exposures had been taken but there was no evidence of Nessie in those pictures.
Once revealed, the pictures mostly show Loch Ness' dark, murky waters and it is believed the camera could have been triggered by the loch's strong underwater currents.
According to Shine, the Instamatic film camera was one of six deployed as part of the project, which was spearheaded by American biologist and scientific director of the Loch Ness Investigation Bureau Roy Mackal. The camera pulled to the surface by Boaty McBoatface was one of three that had been lost in the deep waters during a gale.
The chance encounter came during a routine test of the center's underwater vehicles, which help map seabed habitats.
Sam Smith, from the center's Marine Autonomous Robotics Systems group, said, "While this wasn't a find we expected to make, we're happy that this piece of Nessie hunting history can be shared and perhaps at least the mystery of who left it in the loch can be solved."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Are Pesticides in Your Food Harmful?
Credit - iStockphoto—Getty Images Various chemicals, from those in plastics to food additives, have made headlines lately for their potential roles in triggering diseases. Pesticides are unique among chemicals, though, says Melissa Perry, an environmental epidemiologist and dean of George Mason's College of Public Health. 'They're deliberately manufactured to kill things.' By poisoning weeds, pesticides clear the way for farmers' crops to thrive. But their deadly design may undermine human health, too. A recent report by a new federal advisory board, the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission chaired by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., calls for further investigation of pesticides' effects to determine if their use should be limited. Some evidence does suggest that long-term exposure could lead to cancer and several other serious health problems. More research is needed to better understand these risks, but in the meantime, experts recommend simple, practical steps to reduce intake. Here's what we know about the risks of pesticides and how to lower your exposure. The MAHA report assesses 'root causes' of poor health in U.S. children. It describes pesticides as one of eight types of chemicals giving rise to chronic diseases. The report specifically takes issue with two weed killers, glyphosate and atrazine. They're the most commonly used pesticides by American farmers, and research has focused on them in lab experiments on animals, with several concerning findings. Other studies have drawn links between glyphosate exposure—mainly by consuming trace amounts in food—and health problems, including earlier death. In 2019, a large research review identified a 'compelling link' between glyphosate intake and non-Hodgkin lymphoma in humans, though in 2024 a federal judge criticized this study's design and approach. Additional research points to a range of diseases potentially related to glyphosate, but a recent review by Italian researchers on glyphosate was inconclusive and called for further research. Read More: Seed Oils Don't Deserve Their Bad Reputation Based on the evidence, the World Health Organization (WHO) has described glyphosate as 'probably carcinogenic to humans,' whereas the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found 'no evidence that glyphosate causes cancer in humans,' citing a dataset the agency considered more thorough than WHO's. The second widespread pesticide highlighted by the MAHA report is atrazine. Like glyphosate, it's been used by farmers since the 1960s, but research on animals in the 1990s began to show it could disrupt reproductive health and hormone regulation. Tyrone B. Hayes, a biologist at the University of California, Berkeley, found that atrazine interfered with the sexual development of frogs. Subsequent studies showed similar effects, as well as weight gain, in mice. Researchers have also observed that women in certain agricultural communities experience higher rates of abnormal menstrual cycles, compared to places with fewer farms. Other human studies show increases in several kinds of birth defects. Still more research links atrazine to breast cancer, but researchers at the National Institutes of Health have concluded 'no evidence of an association' with cancer. The EPA estimated that atrazine adversely affects 54% of all species and 50% of all critical habitats. 'I don't know how an Environmental Protection Agency can make a statement like that and then re-register the chemical,' Hayes says. In 2023, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) data showed that 99% of food samples tested below the EPA's safety limit for pesticides. However, U.S. limits are considerably higher than what's allowed in the European Union, where atrazine has been effectively banned. Read More: The Best Longevity Habit You're Not Thinking About Pesticides called organophosphates have been studied by the EPA and others for links to neurological disorders such as ADHD. 'Research clearly shows that children exposed to higher levels did have more neurobehavioral problems,' says Jason Richardson, professor of physiology and pharmacology at the University of Georgia's Isakson Center for Neurological Disease Research. Overall, uncertainty and debate about pesticides continues partly due to research challenges. People are typically exposed to multiple types of chemicals, so it's 'hard to attribute disease to one pesticide or pinpoint the definitive dose or exposure time' that makes people sick, Perry says. 'Just because a chemical is present doesn't mean it's doing anything bad, but in combination with other chemicals, it may be,' Richardson says. 'Efforts are underway to measure these combinations.' 'The country's agricultural policy follows science, not fear, speculation, and fringe narratives,' says Becky Langer-Curry, director of innovation at the National Corn Growers Association. The Corn Growers were 'perplexed' by the MAHA report, she adds. 'We need faith in the EPA's regulatory system to review the science. They're ensuring our food is safe, well below human risk.' In an email to EPA spokesperson Mike Bastasch said the EPA'typically regulates pesticides at least 100 times lower than where no adverse effects are seen in safety studies.' The agency is 'confident that the fruits and vegetables our children are eating are safer than ever,' Bastasch wrote. However, he added that the EPA is updating its evaluation of glyphosate's cancer-causing potential, and it's currently working on an Updated Mitigation Proposal for atrazine. In the meantime, researchers including Perry, Richardson, and Hayes think pesticides are dangerous enough that people should take precautions—but especially young kids, people who are pregnant, those who live close to farms, agricultural workers, and seniors. The first step is to become aware of pesticides in your environment. They're more common than people think, Perry says. 'Exposures happen routinely for most members of the American public.' Experts recommend contacting the environmental office of your county or city to learn whether you're close to a food production facility that uses pesticides. In 2017, kids and teachers at a Hawaii middle school reported unusual throat irritation and dizziness. They suspected the symptoms were caused by pesticides applied in nearby fields, and researchers found residues in the school's indoor and outdoor air samples. Read More: What to Do If Fluoride Is Removed From Your Water The detected levels were deemed below concerning thresholds. Bastasch says that, for communities near farms, the EPA studies potential exposure through the air and other pathways to make sure safety levels are based on sound science. Still, Hayes worries about the long-term effects of pesticide contact and absorption. 'For someone living in a farming community that's constantly exposed to estrogen mimics like atrazine, you're more likely to develop adverse effects,' he says. People take in atrazine mainly through their drinking water, after farm runoff carries the pesticide into local water systems. But some utilities are more effective than others at removing pesticide residues. The Environmental Working Group rates local water utilities. For people on well water, the federal government provides guidelines for testing it. Pesticide use is widespread enough—and disperses at such distances—that everyone should probably use a high-quality water filter, experts say. Atrazine can travel as far as 600 miles, Hayes says. As far back as 1999, USGS noticed that pesticides, including atrazine, were detected in places where farmers hadn't applied them. Even for residents of areas where a water treatment plant removes the chemicals, buying a filter certified to the NSF/ANSI Standards 42 and 53 provides some additional assurance of water safety. Look for filters in refrigerators and water pitchers that meet this certification. Eating organic foods can also help to reduce intake of pesticides, especially glyphosate. About 90% of pregnant women have detectable amounts of glyphosate in their bodies, according to one study. 'But when you put people on organic diets, you start to see that they no longer have pesticides in their urine,' Perry says. Research in 2020 found that eating an organic diet dropped glyphosate levels by 70% in children and their parents. In 2023, researchers put pregnant women on an organic diet for one week. Those who went all-organic decreased glyphosate in their urine by 43%. A 2019 study found a 95% reduction in organophosphates. Richardson calls these studies on organic foods 'intriguing' while noting that natural compounds used in organic farming may also be toxic beyond certain thresholds. Even when eating organic, 'make sure you wash your fruits and vegetables very well,' he says. Read More: Dermatologists Have a Dirty Little Secret One study found that soaking apples in baking soda mixed with water for 12-15 minutes eliminated more residue than water alone. However, according to another study, washing produce with running water is superior to baking soda, sitting water, and vinegar. Other research shows a gentle rubbing action during washing is effective. Aim for 20-30 seconds or longer if you have time. Peeling the skin and outer pulp will get rid of additional residue that penetrates into some produce. There's a major downside, though: you lose a portion of the beneficial nutrients and compounds, like fiber and vitamins, that help protect against pesticide toxicity. Some research suggests that replacing processed foods with diverse whole foods can reduce how many pesticides you ingest (but some research suggests there may be fewer benefits if they're not organic). Aside from nutrition, other lifestyle behaviors such as exercise, stress management, and good sleep may build a baseline of health that helps thwart the cumulative effects of pesticides and other pollutants. Overall, they influence how someone's body responds to their 'exposome,' Richardson explains—your total environmental exposures and how they interact with lifestyle behaviors and risk factors like age and genetics. Bastasch says the EPA assesses the combined risks of groups of pesticides that affect the body in similar ways, adding that the agency is continuing to advance research in this area. The exposome probably matters more than any one chemical type, but 'we're really just breaking the surface of understanding these interactions,' Richardson says. Until more definitive science emerges, maintain smart practices like scrubbing produce and striving for a healthy lifestyle. Contact us at letters@
Time Magazine
2 hours ago
- Time Magazine
Are Pesticides in Your Food Harmful?
Various chemicals, from those in plastics to food additives, have made headlines lately for their potential roles in triggering diseases. Pesticides are unique among chemicals, though, says Melissa Perry, an environmental epidemiologist and dean of George Mason's College of Public Health. 'They're deliberately manufactured to kill things.' By poisoning weeds, pesticides clear the way for farmers' crops to thrive. But their deadly design may undermine human health, too. A recent report by a new federal advisory board, the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission chaired by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., calls for further investigation of pesticides' effects to determine if their use should be limited. Some evidence does suggest that long-term exposure could lead to cancer and several other serious health problems. More research is needed to better understand these risks, but in the meantime, experts recommend simple, practical steps to reduce intake. Here's what we know about the risks of pesticides and how to lower your exposure. Research on pesticide risks The MAHA report assesses 'root causes' of poor health in U.S. children. It describes pesticides as one of eight types of chemicals giving rise to chronic diseases. The report specifically takes issue with two weed killers, glyphosate and atrazine. They're the most commonly used pesticides by American farmers, and research has focused on them in lab experiments on animals, with several concerning findings. Other studies have drawn links between glyphosate exposure—mainly by consuming trace amounts in food—and health problems, including earlier death. In 2019, a large research review identified a 'compelling link' between glyphosate intake and non-Hodgkin lymphoma in humans, though in 2024 a federal judge criticized this study's design and approach. Additional research points to a range of diseases potentially related to glyphosate, but a recent review by Italian researchers on glyphosate was inconclusive and called for further research. Based on the evidence, the World Health Organization (WHO) has described glyphosate as 'probably carcinogenic to humans,' whereas the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found 'no evidence that glyphosate causes cancer in humans,' citing a dataset the agency considered more thorough than WHO's. The second widespread pesticide highlighted by the MAHA report is atrazine. Like glyphosate, it's been used by farmers since the 1960s, but research on animals in the 1990s began to show it could disrupt reproductive health and hormone regulation. Tyrone B. Hayes, a biologist at the University of California, Berkeley, found that atrazine interfered with the sexual development of frogs. Subsequent studies showed similar effects, as well as weight gain, in mice. Researchers have also observed that women in certain agricultural communities experience higher rates of abnormal menstrual cycles, compared to places with fewer farms. Other human studies show increases in several kinds of birth defects. Still more research links atrazine to breast cancer, but researchers at the National Institutes of Health have concluded 'no evidence of an association' with cancer. The EPA estimated that atrazine adversely affects 54% of all species and 50% of all critical habitats. 'I don't know how an Environmental Protection Agency can make a statement like that and then re-register the chemical,' Hayes says. In 2023, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) data showed that 99% of food samples tested below the EPA's safety limit for pesticides. However, U.S. limits are considerably higher than what's allowed in the European Union, where atrazine has been effectively banned. Pesticides called organophosphates have been studied by the EPA and others for links to neurological disorders such as ADHD. 'Research clearly shows that children exposed to higher levels did have more neurobehavioral problems,' says Jason Richardson, professor of physiology and pharmacology at the University of Georgia's Isakson Center for Neurological Disease Research. Overall, uncertainty and debate about pesticides continues partly due to research challenges. People are typically exposed to multiple types of chemicals, so it's 'hard to attribute disease to one pesticide or pinpoint the definitive dose or exposure time' that makes people sick, Perry says. 'Just because a chemical is present doesn't mean it's doing anything bad, but in combination with other chemicals, it may be,' Richardson says. 'Efforts are underway to measure these combinations.' 'The country's agricultural policy follows science, not fear, speculation, and fringe narratives,' says Becky Langer-Curry, director of innovation at the National Corn Growers Association. The Corn Growers were 'perplexed' by the MAHA report, she adds. 'We need faith in the EPA's regulatory system to review the science. They're ensuring our food is safe, well below human risk.' In an email to EPA spokesperson Mike Bastasch said the EPA'typically regulates pesticides at least 100 times lower than where no adverse effects are seen in safety studies.' The agency is 'confident that the fruits and vegetables our children are eating are safer than ever,' Bastasch wrote. However, he added that the EPA is updating its evaluation of glyphosate's cancer-causing potential, and it's currently working on an Updated Mitigation Proposal for atrazine. In the meantime, researchers including Perry, Richardson, and Hayes think pesticides are dangerous enough that people should take precautions—but especially young kids, people who are pregnant, those who live close to farms, agricultural workers, and seniors. How to learn more about your exposure The first step is to become aware of pesticides in your environment. They're more common than people think, Perry says. 'Exposures happen routinely for most members of the American public.' Experts recommend contacting the environmental office of your county or city to learn whether you're close to a food production facility that uses pesticides. In 2017, kids and teachers at a Hawaii middle school reported unusual throat irritation and dizziness. They suspected the symptoms were caused by pesticides applied in nearby fields, and researchers found residues in the school's indoor and outdoor air samples. The detected levels were deemed below concerning thresholds. Bastasch says that, for communities near farms, the EPA studies potential exposure through the air and other pathways to make sure safety levels are based on sound science. Still, Hayes worries about the long-term effects of pesticide contact and absorption. 'For someone living in a farming community that's constantly exposed to estrogen mimics like atrazine, you're more likely to develop adverse effects,' he says. People take in atrazine mainly through their drinking water, after farm runoff carries the pesticide into local water systems. But some utilities are more effective than others at removing pesticide residues. The Environmental Working Group rates local water utilities. For people on well water, the federal government provides guidelines for testing it. Use a water filter Pesticide use is widespread enough—and disperses at such distances—that everyone should probably use a high-quality water filter, experts say. Atrazine can travel as far as 600 miles, Hayes says. As far back as 1999, USGS noticed that pesticides, including atrazine, were detected in places where farmers hadn't applied them. Even for residents of areas where a water treatment plant removes the chemicals, buying a filter certified to the NSF/ANSI Standards 42 and 53 provides some additional assurance of water safety. Look for filters in refrigerators and water pitchers that meet this certification. Buy organic Eating organic foods can also help to reduce intake of pesticides, especially glyphosate. About 90% of pregnant women have detectable amounts of glyphosate in their bodies, according to one study. 'But when you put people on organic diets, you start to see that they no longer have pesticides in their urine,' Perry says. Research in 2020 found that eating an organic diet dropped glyphosate levels by 70% in children and their parents. In 2023, researchers put pregnant women on an organic diet for one week. Those who went all-organic decreased glyphosate in their urine by 43%. A 2019 study found a 95% reduction in organophosphates. Wash and peel Richardson calls these studies on organic foods 'intriguing' while noting that natural compounds used in organic farming may also be toxic beyond certain thresholds. Even when eating organic, 'make sure you wash your fruits and vegetables very well,' he says. One study found that soaking apples in baking soda mixed with water for 12-15 minutes eliminated more residue than water alone. However, according to another study, washing produce with running water is superior to baking soda, sitting water, and vinegar. Other research shows a gentle rubbing action during washing is effective. Aim for 20-30 seconds or longer if you have time. Peeling the skin and outer pulp will get rid of additional residue that penetrates into some produce. There's a major downside, though: you lose a portion of the beneficial nutrients and compounds, like fiber and vitamins, that help protect against pesticide toxicity. Some research suggests that replacing processed foods with diverse whole foods can reduce how many pesticides you ingest (but some research suggests there may be fewer benefits if they're not organic). Exercise and manage stress Aside from nutrition, other lifestyle behaviors such as exercise, stress management, and good sleep may build a baseline of health that helps thwart the cumulative effects of pesticides and other pollutants. Overall, they influence how someone's body responds to their ' exposome,' Richardson explains—your total environmental exposures and how they interact with lifestyle behaviors and risk factors like age and genetics. Bastasch says the EPA assesses the combined risks of groups of pesticides that affect the body in similar ways, adding that the agency is continuing to advance research in this area. The exposome probably matters more than any one chemical type, but 'we're really just breaking the surface of understanding these interactions,' Richardson says. Until more definitive science emerges, maintain smart practices like scrubbing produce and striving for a healthy lifestyle.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
State-level AI regulation ban emerging as D.C. flashpoint
BOSTON (SHNS) – Governors and legislatures 'won't be happy' if the federal government bars them from enacting any state-level regulations on artificial intelligence for the next decade, U.S. Sen. Ed Markey said Wednesday while pledging an effort to get the policy rider tossed from a funding bill. The junior senator from Massachusetts convened civil rights activists and academic experts for a virtual event, where they escalated their opposition to a provision in the U.S. House-approved reconciliation package imposing a 10-year moratorium on state AI restrictions. Markey said that when the bill emerges in the U.S. Senate, he will try to have it eliminated 'as a violation of the Senate rules for reconciliation.' 'We have to be clear about the provision: rather than proposing any plan to address the risks of AI, [the bill would] say you can't do anything about it. But governors are not going to be happy with that, state legislatures won't be happy with it, and I think increasingly, Republicans and Democrats are not going to be happy with it,' Markey said Wednesday. Alondra Nelson, a former Biden administration science official who is now a professor at Princeton University's Institute for Advanced Study, argued that governments cannot wait another decade before pursuing limitations on the use of AI and automated decision-making systems. 'AI systems are already, today, reshaping equality and opportunity in real people's lives. We know that IRS algorithms have disproportionately targeted black taxpayers for audits. We know that facial recognition systems are already leading to wrongful arrests. We know already that insurance companies are using surveillance data that creates discriminatory pricing for different Americans. We know that the uses of AI in health care are sometimes missing cancer in darker-skin patients while detecting it in other patients,' Nelson said. 'These aren't hypothetical future risks. They're certainly not risks that we can wait for 10 years to address. These are documented harms that are happening to members of the American public right now.' The U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee added the moratorium language to the budget reconciliation bill. At a markup hearing last month, committee chair Rep. Brett Guthrie of Kentucky said the proposal would implement 'guardrails that protect against state-level AI laws that could jeopardize our technological leadership.' However, the proposal has drawn some bipartisan pushback. Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia said Tuesday she did not know the 10-year AI regulation ban was in the bill when she voted to advance it and is 'adamantly OPPOSED to this.' She added that she would not vote in favor of the finalized bill — which cleared the House by a one-vote margin — if it returns from the Senate still containing the moratorium. Forty attorneys general, both Democrats and Republicans, jointly penned a letter to congressional leaders on May 16 announcing opposition to the provision, warning that its impact 'would be sweeping and wholly destructive of reasonable state efforts to prevent known harms associated with AI.' Attorneys general previously called for federal AI governance to focus on 'high risk' systems with emphasis on transparency, testing and enforcement. Attorney general letter on AI moratoriumDownload 'Rather than follow the recommendation from the bipartisan coalition of State Attorneys General, the amendment added to the reconciliation bill abdicates federal leadership and mandates that all states abandon their leadership in this area as well,' the 40 AGs wrote in the letter circulated by the National Association of Attorneys General. 'This bill does not propose any regulatory scheme to replace or supplement the laws enacted or currently under consideration by the states, leaving Americans entirely unprotected from the potential harms of AI. Moreover, this bill purports to wipe away any state-level frameworks already in place.' Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell was among the letter's signatories. On Beacon Hill, elected officials have been weighing the potential risks of AI against the economic upsides of a fast-growing industry. Lawmakers and Gov. Maura Healey last year included $100 million in an economic development bond bill to create a Massachusetts AI Hub, which Healey's office said would 'facilitate the application of artificial intelligence across the state's ecosystem.' Lawmakers targeted AI in several bills pending this term, proposing new guardrails around its use in health care decision-making, additional consumer protection measures, a study on greenhouse gas emissions from the electrically demanding technology, and more. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
