Latest news with #researchteam
Daily Mail
a day ago
- Science
- Daily Mail
Earth has over 6 moons you never knew about, scientists reveal
If you thought the Earth only had one moon, think again. Researchers have revealed that our planet may actually have an entire collection orbiting us at any given time. A new study has found that Earth has at least six 'minimoons' in orbit on a regular basis, with most of them being smaller pieces of the actual moon we see in the sky each night. A team from the US, Italy, Germany, Finland, and Sweden said these tiny satellites are generally around six feet in diameter and were formed by asteroids impacting on the moon's surface. The collisions essentially kick up a bunch of dust and moon debris, with some of it being large enough to float away and get pulled into the Earth's gravitational field. The study suggested that these broken moon pieces, known as 'lunar ejecta,' can move into somewhat stable orbits, staying near Earth for years. Minimoons typically stay in Earth's orbit only for a short time before escaping or, in rare cases, hitting our planet or the moon. Most of the time, these temporarily bound objects (TBOs) break away from Earth and are pulled into the sun's gravity, where they'll remain indefinitely, while new chunks of the moon are broken off to replace them. Robert Jedicke, a researcher at the University of Hawaii, said: It's 'kind of like a square dance, where partners change regularly and sometimes leave the dance floor for a while.' 'Given that 18 percent of TBOs can also be classified as minimoons, our nominal results suggest that there should be about 6.5 minimoons larger than 1 m diameter in the [Earth-Moon system] at any time,' the researchers wrote in their new report. The new study could upend the belief among scientists that these minimoons which quietly circle Earth all come from the solar system's asteroid belt. A 2018 study suggested most TBOs come from this distant region which sits between Mars and Jupiter. However, the new findings published in Icarus looked at two recently discovered minimoons, Kamo'oalewa and 2024 PT5, which both appear to have telltale signs of being moon fragments. Specifically, Kamo'oalewa, discovered in 2016 by the Pan-STARRS1 telescope in Hawaii, was found to reflect light in a way that closely matches the moon's surface composition. The large minimoon, which measures between 131 to 328 feet in diameter, also has the same composition of lunar rocks, rich in silicates. This greatly differs from the typical asteroid, which often contains different minerals and metals than those found on the moon. Jedicke told that 2024 PT5, which was discovered entering Earth's orbit on August 7, 2024, has exhibited the same lunar-like characteristics. Last year, 2024 PT5 was dubbed Earth's temporary 'second moon' because of its size and lingering presence so close to our planet. Astronomers collected data on the supposed asteroid as it circled Earth, which led astronomers to suggest that it may have been a chunk of our moon instead. The leading theory of lunar formation is called the 'giant impact hypothesis,' which theorizes that the moon is actually an enormous, orbiting hunk of Earth. According to this theory, our planet collided with a Mars-sized planet roughly four billion years ago, and this triggered an explosion of material from Earth that shot into space and eventually condensed to form the moon. If the giant impact hypothesis and the analysis of 2024 PT5's origin are correct, that would mean our true moon is the parent of this minimoon, and Earth is its grandparent.
Washington Post
a day ago
- Health
- Washington Post
I'm a microplastics researcher. Here's how I limit the plastic in my life.
Microplastics are really small pieces of plastic — less than five millimeters long on one side or about the size of a pencil eraser. That means some of them are visible to the naked eye, but others are so tiny that you can't even see them — smaller than the width of your hair or even a red blood cell. We're exposed to these plastics in countless ways, whether it's the worn car tires that release them into the air or the plastic-lined cans that get them into our food. Scientists have found microplastics in our livers, blood, brains and even placentas. And while more science is needed to fully understand how this impacts our health, there's enough evidence for us to be concerned. A systematic review I conducted with my colleagues in 2024 showed that microplastics are suspected to negatively impact reproductive health, primarily sperm quality, as well as digestive and respiratory health. The evidence suggests microplastics are potential causes of chronic inflammation, which could increase the risk of colon and lung cancer. Other studies have shown a link between microplastics and dementia as well as cardiovascular disease. But there are also effective ways to reduce our exposure through lifestyle changes. The key is to make these slowly over time, and be realistic about your budget and routines. There's no need to throw out all your plastic food-storage containers overnight. Overall, it's about reducing plastic use, particularly single-use plastics. Here's what I've done to limit the microplastics in my life. I know this is hard, but probably the most important thing you can do to reduce your exposure to microplastics is to eat food that you prepare inside your house, made from scratch. Plastic-related chemicals are more commonly found in ultra-processed and fast foods, rather than foods cooked at home, and it's not necessarily clear why. I suspect it may have something to do with all the plastic packaging and the plastic used in the processing. So I try to avoid packaged foods whenever possible. When I travel, I pack my own lunch. Usually, I bring an apple and a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. I buy peanut butter that comes in a glass container, which I reuse for food storage and as drinking water glasses. I bring my own bags to the farmers market. Of course, it's not always possible to avoid plastics touching your food. I haven't figured out a good way to store lettuce that isn't in a plastic bag, so I'm looking for new ways to do that. I still buy rice that comes in a plastic bag. It's possible to buy grains, beans and nuts in bulk — and bring your own containers to the store — but it can be logistically challenging. Especially if you have little kids. I mostly use glass food-storage containers. Have I thrown all my plastic out? No, I have not. But I never use them in the microwave. Research has found that microwaving food in plastic containers can release millions of microplastics into that food. Single-use plastic water bottles can also leech plastics into your water, so I have a stainless steel water bottle that I carry around everywhere. I also avoid nonstick pans and pots, since these can be made with PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) — or 'forever chemicals,' as they're often known. Instead, I use a clay rice cooker, stainless steel pots and pans, and a cast-iron skillet that was my grandmother's. It still works great, and I can fry an egg in it without a problem. I use wooden and stainless steel cooking utensils — and avoid black plastics. I eat lower on the food chain, sticking to fruits and vegetables. There is still a lot to learn here, but we know that chemicals are more prevalent in larger animals. So I avoid red meat and ruminant animals such as goat and lamb. I also focus on eating whole grains and beans. And this is consistent with other dietary food guidelines. I do eat some fish. I recommend eating smaller fish in general, since larger fish, such as tuna and swordfish, have a longer lifespan and can accumulate pollutants like mercury. We still don't know the full extent of the microplastics in these animals. But we do know that eating lower down on the food chain is probably a good way to ensure your exposure is lower. Microplastics love to hang out in dust. One efficient way to decrease the amount in your home is to use a vacuum with a HEPA filter. HEPA stands for high-efficiency particulate air — meaning these vacuums are effective at removing very tiny particles around your house, including microplastics. I also suggest using a wet mop or microfiber cloth to clean up around the house, which won't stir up dust. My husband does this once a week at our house. Some abrasive cleaning products, such as the kinds that have little particles to help you scrub, may have microplastics. The same goes for personal care products, such as exfoliants. I avoid these as well as any products with fragrances, since some companies place fragrances within tiny microplastic capsules so the scent will last longer. The idea of avoiding microplastics can seem overwhelming — even to me, a person who has dedicated their life to studying environmental contaminants — but a few small steps can make a difference to reduce your exposure and improve your overall health. And it's important to remember: It's not your fault. The bottom line is that it's hard for an individual to control the production of plastic, and we need systemic changes to lower our exposures. Tracey Woodruff, PhD, MPH, is a professor in the department of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of California at San Francisco, whose research focuses on environmental contaminants and their effect on vulnerable populations, such as pregnant women and children.
The Independent
2 days ago
- Health
- The Independent
Beetroot juice ‘lowers older people's blood pressure by changing mouth bacteria'
Beetroot juice lowers blood pressure in older people by suppressing potentially harmful bacteria in the mouth, a study suggests. Experts at the University of Exeter compared the responses of younger adults and older adults to beetroot juice, which is rich in dietary nitrates. These nitrates are converted by the body into nitric oxide, which helps to relax and widen blood vessels and lower blood pressure. The study included 39 adults under the age of 30, and 36 people in their 60s and 70s. For two weeks, each group were given shots of beetroot juice. After a two-week break, during which people were given anti-septic mouthwash everyday, the groups were then given a placebo juice with the nitrate stripped out for a fortnight. Researchers used gene sequencing to analyse the bacteria present in the mouth after each part of the trial. In both groups, the so-called oral microbiome – the complex ecosystem of microorganisms in the mouth – changed after drinking the nitrate-rich juice, although the effects differed. In older people, there was a decline in common bacteria that can sometimes cause infections, and an increase in bacteria that can benefit health. Researchers also found the older group had decreased blood pressure after drinking the nitrate-rich juice for two weeks. Professor Andy Jones, of the University of Exeter, said: 'This study shows that nitrate-rich foods alter the oral microbiome in a way that could result in less inflammation, as well as a lowering of blood pressure in older people. 'This paves the way for larger studies to explore the influence of lifestyle factors and biological sex in how people respond to dietary nitrate supplementation.' Professor Anni Vanhatalo, of the University of Exeter, added: 'We know that a nitrate-rich diet has health benefits, and older people produce less of their own nitric oxide as they age. 'They also tend to have higher blood pressure, which can be linked to cardiovascular complications like heart attack and stroke. 'Encouraging older adults to consume more nitrate-rich vegetables could have significant long term health benefits. 'The good news is that if you don't like beetroot, there are many nitrate-rich alternatives like spinach, rocket, fennel, celery and kale.' The study, published in the journal Free Radical Biology and Medicine, was funded by a BBSRC Industrial Partnership Award. Dr Lee Beniston, associate director for industry partnerships and collaborative research and development at BBSRC, said: 'This research is a great example of how bioscience can help us better understand the complex links between diet, the microbiome and healthy ageing. 'By uncovering how dietary nitrate affects oral bacteria and blood pressure in older adults, the study opens up new opportunities for improving vascular health through nutrition.'
Daily Mail
3 days ago
- Science
- Daily Mail
Scientists are BAFFLED after discovering a mysterious new structure hiding inside human cells
Scientists have discovered a mysterious new structure lurking inside every human cell. These tiny structures, dubbed hemifusomes, are just 200 to 400 nanometres in diameter. To put that into perspective, that's about 500 times thinner than a human hair. Scientists believe the structures play a critical role in helping our cells recycle and discard waste materials. Co-author Dr Seham Ebrahim, of the University of Virginia, says: 'It's exciting because finding something truly new inside cells is rare - and it gives us a whole new path to explore. 'This is like discovering a new recycling centre inside the cell. 'We think the hemifusome helps manage how cells package and process material, and when this goes wrong, it may contribute to diseases that affect many systems in the body.' In the future, the finding could help scientists to develop treatments for conditions such as Hermansky-Pudlak syndrome - a rare genetic disorder that can cause albinism, vision problems, and lung disease. Since hemifusomes are exceptionally small, the researchers needed extremely sensitive equipment to spot them. The team used a method called cryo-electron tomography, in which samples are rapidly frozen to around -150°C (-240°F) before being sliced very thinly. The scientists then took lots of photos with a powerful microscope which uses electrons instead of visible light. This allowed them to look at extremely small structures just as they would appear in a living cell by freezing them in time, rather than damaging the samples by trying to preserve them. Using this method, a team of researchers from the University of Virginia spotted structures which looked like two thin bubbles stuck together at the edges. The researchers believe hemifusomes produce vesicles - tiny sacs that act as 'mixing bowls', as well as making structures made of lots of these vesicles. Dr Ebrahim says: 'You can think of vesicles like little delivery trucks inside the cell. 'The hemifusome is like a loading dock where they connect and transfer cargo. It's a step in the process we didn't know existed.' By placing vesicles inside themselves, hemifusoles can store and combine different chemicals and waste products. Scientists think that some diseases might be caused when this process is disrupted By building vesicles, and even putting vesicles inside each other, the hemifusomes allow our cells to package and sort proteins or recycle parts of the cell. One thing that the researchers were surprised to find is that the layer which connects the hemifusome and the vesicles is much thinner than scientists previously thought possible. This 'hemifusion diaphragm' sticks to the two structures together but doesn't let their contents mix, like two water balloons that have melted together at the edges. Previously, scientists thought these types of structures would be too unstable to do anything useful in our cells. But in the hemifusome, the researchers spotted them playing a really important role in keeping our cells healthy. That discovery could have big implications for how we understand and treat diseases which interfere with our cells' recycling functions. Dr Ebrahim says: 'We're just beginning to understand how this new organelle fits into the bigger picture of cell health and disease. 'Now that we know hemifusomes exist, we can start asking how they behave in healthy cells and what happens when things go wrong. That could lead us to new strategies for treating complex genetic diseases. Cells in numbers Scientists believe the first known cells originated on Earth 3.8 billion years ago. The diameter in centimeters of most animal cells is 0.001 to 0.003, making them invisible to the naked eye. In 1665, British scientist Robert Hooke coined the term cell to describe the porous, grid-like structure he saw when viewing a thin slice of cork under a microscope. There are 200 different types of cells are in the human body. There are 24 hours in an animal cell cycle, the time from a cell's formation to when it splits in two to make more cells. A human red blood cells lives about 120 days. Each day, approximately 50 to 70 billion cells die in the human.
Daily Mail
3 days ago
- Health
- Daily Mail
Boy or girl? Chance of having a son or daughter is NOT 50/50, scientists say
From flipping a coin to guessing the outcome of a yes/no question, there are many things that have a 50/50 chance of happening. For years, it was assumed that the chance of having a son or daughter also fit into this category. But a shocking new study has revealed that this isn't actually the case. Scientists from Harvard University have discovered that some women are much more likely to have children of only one sex. In their study, the team analysed data from more than 58,000 mothers who had given birth to at least one child. Their results revealed that maternal age plays a key role in determining the sex of the babies. 'The human sex ratio has long been of interest of biologists, statisticians, demographers, sociologists, and economists,' the team explained. 'Here, we showed that within each sibship size, sex at birth did not conform with a simple binomial distribution and identified a significant intramother correlation in offspring sex.' The sex of a baby is determined by the combination of sex chromosomes inherited from the sperm and egg. While the egg always carries an X chromosome, the sperm can either carry an X or a Y. If the sperm carrying an X chromosome fertilises the egg, the embryo will be female, while the embryo will be male if it's a Y chromosome. This has long been considered to be a 50/50 split. However, in their new study, published in Science Advances, the scientists questioned whether this is really the case. 'Several coauthors, however, observed cases of friends, colleagues, first-degree relatives, or themselves that produce offspring of only one sex raising questions about chance,' the team explained. To get to the bottom of it, the team analysed data from 58,007 US women who had had at least two children. The researchers investigated the impact of eight maternal traits - height, body mass index, race, hair colour, blood type, chronotype (whether or not you're an early bird or a night owl), age at first menstruation, and the age when they had their first child. What determines the sex of a baby? The sex of a baby is determined by the combination of sex chromosomes inherited from the sperm and egg. While the egg always carries an X chromosome, the sperm can either carry an X or a Y. If the sperm carrying an X chromosome fertilises the egg, the embryo will be female, while the embryo will be male if it's a Y chromosome. Seven of these traits did not impact the sex of the baby. However, their analysis uncovered a key link between the age at which the mother had their first child, and whether or not they had boys or girls. Women who were older than 28 when they first gave birth had a 43 per cent chance of having children of only one sex. But women who were younger than 23 when they first became a mother only had a 34 per cent chance of having children of only one sex. 'Older maternal age may be associated with higher odds of having single-sex offspring, but other heritable, demographic, and/or reproductive factors were unrelated to offspring sex,' the researchers explained. The reason for this link remains unclear. However, the researchers say it could be associated with the physiological changes women go through as they age - including a shorter follicular phase, and a lower vaginal pH. 'A shorter follicular phase tends to favor Y chromosome survival, whereas a more acidic vaginal environment favors X chromosome survival,' the team explained. 'Each woman may have a different predisposition to each of these factors as they age, which could lead to a higher probability of consistently producing same-sex offspring. 'However, these mechanisms remain speculative, and more detailed data are required to confirm these hypotheses.' Overall, the findings suggest that the chance of having a boy or girl is not 50/50 after all. 'Families desiring offspring of more than one sex who have already had two or three children of the same sex should be aware that when trying for their next one, they are probably doing a coin toss with a two-headed coin,' they team concluded.
