Venice spent 6 billion on a dam to stop the sea. There are those who already see it as the only future left for the Bay of Cádiz

In the first two months of 2026, Venice had to raise its large mobile dock 30 times. In the last five years, he has had to do it another 108 times in total. Nobody can say that the work of 6 billion that was going to save the lagoon has not been necessary; What can be said is that it closes so often that it threatens to suffocate just what protects. 2,000 kilometers away, in the bay of Cádiz, the sea is eating away at the largest tidal-influenced saline wetland in Spain. And the shadow of the great dam begins to hover over the problem. Is Venice the future of the Silver Cup? Let’s start by x-raying the problem. The sea has been advancing over the bay for decades, that cannot surprise anyone. Perhaps the only thing that has changed in recent years is that salt farmers, aquaculturists, scientists and ecologists have sat at the same table with a common diagnosis. Its ambition is much smaller than that of Venice, but we are light years away from Venice. What they are asking for is something as simple as the competent administrations coordinating. Coordinate for what? To prevent a good part of the saline wetland from dying. This wetland is structured around the so-called “outside turns“: soft dikes that stop spring tides and storms. They are not “natural things”, they are the product of centuries of human work. And when there is someone who maintains them, they endure, they tame the sea, they control the storms. The problem is that there is almost no one to maintain them. Today, around 80% of the salt mines are abandoned; Of the 160 artisanal salt mines that existed in the 70s, four remain. In other words, what is happening in the Bay is a disaster labeled ‘natural’, but with socioeconomic roots. The result is clear. In points like the south of Puerto Real, the sea advances about 3 meters a year, according to calculations from the University of Cádiz. And it is now just over 200 meters from the first houses. A few kilometers from there, 94,000 inhabitants (the people of San Fernando) live below sea level and this protected natural park is their main line of defense. If the estimates of the Blue Bay Alliance They are right and the sea rises between 55 and 70 centimeters, there will be many people who will suffer the consequences. And we will put our hands on our heads and wonder how it was possible. Then, just then, people will start talking seriously about the wall. But it will be a mistake. So far no one has asked for the Venetian MOSE and, in fact, the ‘concrete’ that the Alliance talks about is something very different and much more surgical. His basic proposal is to return to the walls permeable to the tide: to use all our modern technology to try to rescue traditional engineering. That is, keeping an extremely complex ecosystem alive. And that’s the heart of the matter: the Venice Wall could protect the new parts of San Fernando when the time comes, but it couldn’t keep the bay alive. We have to decide if we want to invest Now it’s cheap, but the risk is diffuse. Or invest later, when it is expensive, but clear and real. Image | Alain Rouiller In Xataka | Venice spent 5 billion euros on flood barriers. Five years later they are already “unsustainable”

Alzheimer’s leaves its mark decades before showing its face:; keeping vitamin D at bay is already a promising shield

Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia remain one of the most complex medical puzzles of our era, standing out above all for the absence of treatments that completely stop the disease or even reverse it. But science continues to advance and has now focused on a preventive factor that could be in our hands from a young age: vitamin D. It keeps moving forward. The main study that has sparked interest was published at the beginning of this month of April in the magazine Neurology. And the objective of this was none other than to shed light on how our brain behaves decades before the classic symptoms of dementia appear. To get here, a total of 793 participants from the renowned Framingham Heart Study with an average age of 39 years were monitored. From here, the serum vitamin D of the patients began to be measured between 2002 and 2005, and then, at the age of 16, they underwent different scans to check the state of the brain. What was seen. In conclusion, the study pointed out that maintaining higher levels of vitamin D, greater than 30 nanograms per mL, during the ages of 30 to 40 is associated with less subsequent accumulation of the tau protein in the brain. Because it matters. The relevance of this discovery is crucial and to understand it, you just have to know that Alzheimer’s occurs because two factors mainly come together: Beta-amyloid protein plaques, which accumulate outside neurons. Neurofibrillary tangles of tau protein, which form within the brain cells themselves and are closely linked to neuronal death and cognitive decline. In this way, the effort of science right now is focused above all on blocking the formation of beta-amyloid plaques around neurons or preventing the tau protein from accumulating in our neurons. Although it is something really complicated. There is a nuance. Interestingly, the study found no association between midlife vitamin D levels and beta-amyloid accumulation. The protective effect is limited exclusively to the tau protein, especially in the brain regions where Alzheimer’s usually strikes its first blows. This is good news, as it narrows down the biological mechanisms involved and suggests that vitamin D could play a specific role in the pathways that regulate how tau is produced or eliminated over the years. There is small print. As they warn in the press release itself, this is a simple observational study. This means that it is true that people with higher vitamin D in middle age accumulated less tau protein, but the study cannot categorically state that vitamin D destroys tau protein on its own. Furthermore, the authors of the study themselves are categorical: this finding is not a medical prescription. There is no current evidence to justify that massively supplementing with vitamin D pills at age 40 will protect the brain against dementia. This simply paves the way for future research to truly test this relationship in a clinical trial and lead to new treatments. Images | catalyststuff freepik In Xataka | More than half of the population in Spain has a vitamin D deficiency. Now a study questions the benefits of supplementation

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.