Aussies stunned by ‘fireball' meteor
The bright fireball passed through the skies about 6am on Sunday over the Central Wheatbelt, producing a brilliant yellow flash and a trail of bright green.
Witnesses were able to catch a glimpse of the early-morning meteor from Perth to the Goldfields, however, experts are yet to determine where it eventually landed.
The Perth Observatory said the astronomical sight was 'most likely an iron meteor' which had been 'orbiting within the inner Solar System'.
'To shine that brightly, the fireball — technically known as a bolide — would have been about the size of a cricket ball to a basketball,' the observatory said online.
According to Perth Observatory's Matthew Woods, the meteor would have been travelling between 16 to 60km per second, leaving behind a trail of green as the built-up friction melted.
He told 9News it was 'one hell of a meteor'.
'That was very nice … little surprise for Mother's Day,' he said.
Online, witnesses were dumbfounded by the 'spectacular' sight, with some believing it was an aeroplane.
'Never seen anything like it,' one person wrote.
'Thought someone was driving at us with high beams on at first,' said another, who watched it pass overhead from Newdegate.
A resident from Mt Magnet said they initially thought the 'huge and burning bright orange-red' light was 'the moon until it moved'.
Some thought the meteor was the Kosmos 482, a Soviet-era spacecraft that plunged back to earth more than 50 years after its failed launch to Venus.
However, Curtin University astrophysicist Steven Tingay told the ABC it was unlikely the fallen spacecraft, which likely landed over the Indian Ocean on Saturday, though European and US agencies are yet to confirm its exact location.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
8 hours ago
- Medscape
Do Women With Acute ACS Face Unnecessary Bleeding Risk?
A consensus statement from two European cardiology organizations contends antithrombotic treatment for myocardial infarction and angina overlooks sex differences that heighten bleeding risk in women. Compared with men, women treated for acute coronary syndromes (ACS) are at a greater risk for in-hospital bleeding related to invasive cardiac procedures and more long-term outpatient bleeding events, according to the statement from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions and the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Thrombosis. Antithrombotic therapies such as heparin and fondaparinux used in invasive ACS procedures typically have a similar efficacy in women and men, but women have a higher bleeding risk of these agents, said Davide Capodanno, MD, PhD, professor of cardiology at the University of Catania, Catania, Italy, and co-author of the consensus statement. Some ways to reduce bleeding risk in women are to adjust antithrombotic dosing for body weight and kidney function, Capodanno told Medscape Medical News , and to opt for radial access over femoral access for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). 'Our paper shows that women still experience delays in diagnosis and treatment, receive excessive antithrombotic doses more often, and remain underrepresented in trials,' Capodanno said. 'All of this creates the need for clear, pragmatic, sex-informed recommendations.' Physiologic Differences Hormonal differences between men and women play an important role in bleeding risk. Estrogen promotes the production of prostacyclin, increases the availability of nitric oxide, and reduces platelet aggregation. These features might protect against the earlier onset of coronary artery disease, but fluctuations in hormonal status due to the menstrual cycle, use of oral contraceptives, menopause, and hormone replacement therapy can also influence thrombotic and bleeding risks. Sex differences in protease-activated receptor signaling pathways, smaller coronary artery sizes, and a cascade of other factors contribute to the greater risk for bleeding associated with ACS treatment (Figure). Although ACS typically affects postmenopausal women, the incidence is increasing in premenopausal women, whose bleeding risk is even more elevated because of lower platelet reactivity due to estrogen receptors on the platelet surface. Data from nearly 4000 women and 10,000 men undergoing PCI showed women younger than 50 years were four times more likely than men of the same age to experience major and minor bleeding events associated with stenting. Wanted: More Sex-Specific Data Women also often experience delays in the diagnosis of ACS and referral for invasive treatments, such as PCI, for their condition. Clinicians still lack strong evidence to help them address sex differences in clotting and response to anticoagulation, Capodanno suggested. Awareness is improving, but there's still work to be done. 'We simply don't have enough sex-powered data to guide all our decisions. Women remain underrepresented in clinical trials, which limits the strength of sex-specific evidence,' Capodanno said. 'We need to push for more equitable research by enrolling and retaining more women in clinical studies and ensuring that results are analyzed and published separately for men and women.' Sunil V. Rao, MD, lead author of the 2025 joint clinical practice guidelines on ACS from the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association, agreed. 'There are very few clinical trials of bleeding reduction that have strong female representation,' said Rao, deputy director of the Leon H. Charney Division of Cardiology and director of interventional cardiology at NYU Langone Heart in New York City. One such study, the SAFE-PCI for Women randomized trial Rao led, compared radial access and femoral access in women undergoing stenting. The research showed using radial instead of femoral access for the intervention reduces the risk for bleeding in women. 'We need more trials like this to help guide the clinical community on how to mitigate the risks of antithrombotic therapy in women,' Rao said. Take-Home: Male Isn't Norm How can individual clinicians adjust their practice? 'We recommend actively reducing bleeding risk — for example, using radial access whenever possible, using ultrasound guidance if femoral access is needed, and always avoiding overdosing by adjusting for weight and kidney function,' Capodanno said. Prompt treatment is key to avoid sex-related delays in starting antithrombotic medications. 'Also, be mindful of sex-specific presentations in ACS,' he added. Among these is myocardial infarction with nonobstructive coronary arteries, which includes spontaneous coronary artery dissection, responsible for 25%-35% of myocardial infarctions in women younger than 50 years. According to Rao, European guidelines are generally consistent with North American recommendations with respect to antithrombotic strategies for ACS. 'I don't think we can make strong recommendations to change practice just yet,' he said. 'The message really is to counsel patients, especially female patients, on the benefit-risk balance of antithrombotic therapy, to use evidence-based approaches to reduce bleeding risk — such as radial access — and to refer female patients for clinical trials when possible.' Capodanno reported payment for speaker fees and advisory board participation from Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, and Terumo. Rao reported no relevant financial conflicts of interest.
Washington Post
9 hours ago
- Washington Post
Why America must win the race for nuclear-powered space exploration
Elsayed Talaat is president and chief executive officer of the Universities Space Research Association. By any measure, the space race is back. But unlike the Cold War-era competition, decided by the Apollo 11 moon landing in 1969, the moment of triumph will be less distinct than Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin's planting the U.S. flag at Tranquility Base — and ultimately more consequential. Victory in this new contest — with entrants including the United States, China, Russia and India — will go to the program that first masters nuclear-powered space travel. This capability will determine who leads in space exploration, in space mining and manufacturing, in national security and in scientific discovery for decades to come.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Using AI Made Doctors Worse at Spotting Cancer Without Assistance
Credit - Getty Images Health practitioners, companies, and others have for years hailed the potential benefits of AI in medicine, from improving medical imaging to outperforming doctors at diagnostic assessments. The transformative technology has even been predicted by AI enthusiasts to one day help find a 'cure to cancer.' But a new study has found that doctors who regularly used AI actually became less skilled within months. The study, which was published on Wednesday in the Lancet Gastroenterology and Hepatology journal, found that over the course of six months, clinicians became over-reliant on AI recommendations and became themselves 'less motivated, less focused, and less responsible when making cognitive decisions without AI assistance.' It's the latest study to demonstrate potential adverse outcomes on AI users. An earlier study by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that ChatGPT eroded critical thinking skills. How the study was conducted Researchers across various European institutions conducted an observational study surveying four endoscopy centers in Poland that participated in the Artificial Intelligence in Colonoscopy for Cancer Prevention (ACCEPT) trial. The study was funded by the European Commission and Japan Society for the Promotion of Science. As part of the trial, the centers had introduced AI tools for the detection of polyps—growths that can be benign or cancerous—in late 2021. The study looked at 1,443 non-AI-assisted colonoscopies out of a total 2,177 colonoscopies conducted between September 2021 and March 2022. The colonoscopies were performed by 19 experienced endoscopists. Researchers compared the quality of colonoscopy conducted three months before and three months after AI was implemented. Colonoscopies were conducted either with or without AI assistance, at random. Of those conducted without AI assistance, 795 were conducted before regular AI use was implemented and 648 were conducted after the AI tools were introduced. What the study found Three months before AI was introduced, the adenoma detection rate (ADR) was around 28%. Three months after AI was introduced, the rate dropped to 22% when clinicians were unassisted by AI. ADR is a commonly used quality indicator for colonoscopies and represents 'the proportion of screening colonoscopies performed by a physician that detect at least one histologically confirmed colorectal adenoma or adenocarcinoma.' Adenomas are precancerous growths, and a higher ADR is associated with a lower risk of colorectal cancer. The study found that AI did help endoscopists with detection when used, but once the assistance was removed, clinicians were worse at detection. Researchers attributed it to 'the natural human tendency to over-rely' on the recommendations of decision support systems like AI. 'Imagine that you want to travel anywhere, and you're unable to use Google Maps,' Marcin Romańczyk, co-author of the study and an assistant professor at the Medical University of Silesia, told MedPage Today. 'We call it the Google Maps effect. We try to get somewhere, and it's impossible to use a regular map. It works very similarly.' Implications of the study Omer Ahmad, a consultant gastroenterologist at University College Hospital London who wrote an editorial alongside the study but was not involved in its research, tells TIME that it's likely that exposure to AI weakened doctors' visual search habits and alerting gaze patterns, which are critical for detecting polyps. 'In essence, dependence on AI detection could dull human pattern recognition,' Ahmad says. He adds that regular use of AI could also 'reduce diagnostic confidence' when AI assistance is withdrawn, or that the endoscopists' skill of manoeuvring the colonoscope could be reduced. In comments to the Science Media Center (SMC), Catherine Menon, principal lecturer at the University of Hertfordshire's Department of Computer Science, said: 'Although de-skilling resulting from AI use has been raised as a theoretical risk in previous studies, this study is the first to present real-world data that might potentially indicate de-skilling arising from the use of AI in diagnostic colonoscopies.' Menon raised concerns that overreliance on AI could leave health practitioners at risk to technological compromise. Other experts are more cautious about drawing conclusions from a single study. Venet Osmani, a professor of clinical AI and machine learning at Queen Mary University of London, noted to SMC that the total number of colonoscopies—including both AI-assisted and non-AI-assisted ones—increased over the course of the study. The increased workload, Osmani suggested, could have led to clinician fatigue and poorer detection rates. Allan Tucker, a professor of artificial intelligence at Brunel University of London, also noted that with AI assistance, clinician performance improved overall. Concerns about deskilling due to automation bias, added Tucker to SMC, 'is not unique to AI systems and is a risk with the introduction of any new technology.' 'The ethical question then is whether we trust AI over humans,' said Tucker. 'Often, we expect there to be a human overseeing all AI decision-making but if the human experts are putting less effort into their own decisions as a result of introducing AI systems this could be problematic.' 'This is not simply about monitoring technology,' says Ahmad. 'It's about navigating the complexities of a new human-AI clinical ecosystem.' Establishing safeguards is critical, he adds, suggesting that beyond this study, people may need to focus on 'preserving essential skills in a world where AI becomes ubiquitous.' Contact us at letters@
