We believed that polar bears were doomed to disappear. In Norway they are getting fatter and healthier

For decades, the polar bear has become in the indisputable symbol of the climate crisis that we are living. The equation seemed quite simple and devastating: if there is less sea ice, they will be able to hunt less and, therefore, the bears will be more malnourished and may disappear. But what we are seeing has broken this logic, at least in one specific region of the Arctic. The paradigm shift. Against all odds, the polar bears of the Savalbard Archipelago, Norwayhave presented a better body condition than 25 years agoeven though their habitat is melting at a fast pace. And this has generated many questions. In order to answer this, the study led by Jon Aars of the Norwegian Polar Institutehas provided conclusive data after decades of monitoring these animals. all this thanks to 770 polar bears that have been in the focus of the study during the years 1995 and 2019 in the Barents region. They are getting fat. After analyzing all the measurement results, it was found that an ecological paradox existed: although the ice-free season in the area has lengthened significantly, these bears are increasing their weight significantly since 2005. The big question here is… How possible? The answer. The key to this unexpected resilience seems to lie in the unique biological productivity of the Barents Sea and in the adaptation capacity of these predators. According to the study, several simultaneous factors have occurred, such as prey density. This means that the loss of ice has concentrated these bears’ prey in smaller, coastal areas, paradoxically making them more accessible at certain times. But it does not stop there, since an increase in the number of seals has also been seen, and especially in bearded seals which is a much larger prey and rich in fat. A change of diet. This is where the flexibility of the predator comes in, since Svalbard’s eyes have begun to supplement their diet with terrestrial resources, including reindeer and bird eggstaking advantage of what the land offers when the sea fails. In short, Svalbard’s bears live in a “bubble” of ecological abundance that has cushioned, for now, the physical impact of ice loss due to global warming. There is no need to celebrate it. It is easy to fall into the temptation of using this study to minimize the impact of climate change because the fact that ice is becoming less and less has not affected the species. But the authors of the study point out that this is an anomaly that occurs in this specific area of ​​the Arctic but is not a global trend. In this way, while the bears of Svalbard enjoy this temporary respite, their relatives in Hudson Bay (Canada) and other regions of the Arctic show severe signs of malnutrition and above all a decrease in the number of animals. And the difference is that not all Arctic ecosystems are as rich as the Barents Sea. A mirage. This is what the study warns that we may have in front of us, since now the bear has been able to adapt to the situation, but the sea ice continues to retreat, we do not know what will happen. What is expected is that a tipping point may be reached where not even the richness of prey or reindeer eggs will be enough to sustain the current population, starting a new ecological crisis here. Images | Hans-Jurgen Mager In Xataka | They’re not kissing, they’re scanning: the complex science behind nose-to-nose contact in the animal kingdom

Millions in advertising convinced us that bottled water was healthier. Until microplastics arrived

On many occasions we can associate bottled water as a higher quality option to hydrate ourselves above tap water. But the reality is that the latest scientific analyzes indicate that bottled water is a direct source of exposure to nano and microplastics (NMPs). This means that regular bottled water consumers may be ingesting up to 90,000 additional plastic particles per year compared to those who drink tap water. Something that breaks with the idea that we can reach everyone that bottled water is much healthier as they have always tried to sell us. The invisible enemy. The studypublished in the magazine Journal of Hazardous Materials defines microplastics as particles between 1 micrometer and 5 mm and nanoplastics as those smaller than 1 micrometer. Ultimately, very small particles that are released from plastic bottles throughout their life cycle. How they are released. According to the study, the particles are released not only by the natural degradation of plastic, but also by everyday physical and environmental stressors. For example, the simple act of opening and closing the cap or squeezing the bottle to drink generates friction that ends with the release of particles into the water. Another very common case is leaving the water bottle in the sun for a certain time. Many plastic particles are being released here because the degradation of the packaging is increasing. But in the opposite case, in freezing, we also have this same problem because it has also been shown that it is a factor that increases contamination by microplastics. Size matters. Once these particles are ingested, Its effect will depend on the size it has.. In general, the smaller it is, the more worrying it is for our body, since the more easily it will be able to cross biological barriers. If we talk about particles larger than 150 micrometers, the truth is that we can rest assured because they will directly pass through the digestive tract to the feces. But if they are smaller than 150 micrometers, they will be able to cross the intestinal cavity and enter the lymphatic and circulatory system, being able to reach the organs with particles smaller than 20 micrometers. But the real danger is in particles smaller than 100 nanometers that are considered nanoplastics. In this case, the particles are small enough to reach all organs, including the ability to cross such critical barriers as the blood-brain barrier and the placenta. The dangers. Continued exposure to nano- and microplastics is linked to a number of chronic health problems. This is not acute toxicity, but long-term cumulative damage. Among the main risks that have been identified are respiratory diseases, reproductive products, disruption of the immune system or increased oxidative stress. The challenge. One of the great challenges for researchers is the lack of standardized methods to analyze these plastics. Right now different tests can be found, but they vary in sensitivity and precision, which makes it difficult to reach a common criterion between the different studies in order to have a general image of the big problem before us. Right now, some techniques can detect very small particles, but not their composition, while others do the opposite, which is a very important limitation. But despite these, some studies already point to significant differences between the water brands we find on the market. For example, research cited in the report found that Nestle Pure Life and Bisleri had some of the highest average concentrations of microplastic particles. Regulation. This lack of standardization in studies has contributed to a large “legislative vacuum” in our society. And while there has been legislation on plastic bags, straws or single-use cutlery, water bottles have largely been left out of the regulatory focus. In this way, the author of the study points out that the consumption of water in plastic bottles should be done in emergency situations, but not as a daily practice due to the high consumption of microplastics that we are going to end up ingesting and that would generate a long-term problem. And we have already witnessed precisely how they have appeared microplastics in human testiclesthe breast milkthe blood, archaeological remains or also in the foods we eatlike the vegetables we consume. That is why in the long run we will have to specifically see the impact that prolonged consumption will have through different means, and not just bottled water. Images | Jonathan Cooper In Xataka | From causing diarrhea to making biodegradable plastics: the E. coli bacteria has a new job in Japan

The secret for a healthier chocolate is in prebiotics and probiotics. And now we know the “recipe”

The effect of chocolate on our health is ambiguous. Although some of these preparations based on the fruit of cocoa can report benefits for our health, the usual thing is usually that the sugar and other additions end up deriving in a final product far from being classified as “healthy”. Chocolate, healthier. Now, a group of researchers works on the development of a chocolate with additives that make it healthier. For this they have resorted to add prebiotic and probiotic ingredients in their recipe. Prebiotics + probiotics. Pre- and probiotics are two types of foods that help Regulate our intestinal microbioma. The difference between them is how they do it. Prebiotics are foods that provide nutrients to this microbiome. While probiotics are foods that provide us with microbiota, that is, they contain organisms such as bacteria that help us develop our digestive functions more effectively. The proposal of this team of researchers is to add prebiotic and probiotic ingredients to chocolate. Until now, the idea of ​​adding these elements to chocolate had already been investigated, but doing so had become a somewhat “laborious” task, those responsible for the new study explain. To avoid this complication, the team decided to resort to prebiotics that required a minimum processing such as corn and honey. Five formulas. The team combined the ingredients in different ways to obtain five formulas to compare. The first, reference, contained the usual ingredients in chocolate (such as cocoa butter, powdered cocoa and powdered milk). The rest contained prebiotics (corn and honey); a prebiotic (which could be Lactobacillus Acidophilus LA-14, o Lactobacillus rhamnosus Gg), and an additive to give flavor (which would be cinnamon or orange). Keeping sensations. One of the factors that the equipment wanted to put to the test were the fat levels of these products since the texture of the resulting product depends on these. They found that the formulas maintained this characteristic consistently but also pointed out some differences between conventional chocolate and sinbiotics (those that were subject to the study). For example They observed They added orange showed a lower pH (greater acidity), greater humidity and higher protein levels compared to the rest. They also observed that the four symbiotic chocolates presented higher levels of antioxidants. These lost some consistency, which made them less crispy. Counting microbes. The study also included an analysis of the survival capacity of the bacteria used. They found that these continued to maintain their vitality after 125 days of chocolate storage. The team also submitted these to “stomach conditions” and found that microbes were also able to survive these conditions for more than five hours. The details of the study were published In an article In the magazine ACS Food Science & Technology. The benefits (and risks) of chocolate. The effects, positive and negative, of chocolate can be associated with certain compounds, some present in their main ingredient and others in additives. One of the key elements is antioxidants. Antioxidants are especially in black chocolate, and among them Epicatechina stands outa type of flavonol. These compounds can protect us from free radicals, which has been associated with better cardiac health, a “balanced” immune system, a lower risk of diabetes, and other potential benefits. On the other hand, the sugars and fats present in chocolates can be made harmful if we consume excessive amounts, especially if we consume is not dark chocolate but more sweetened versions of the product. In Xataka | Some scientists designed the “perfect chocolate”, and the secret is in physics Image | Tamas Pap

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.