problem

We’ve been telling ourselves for 100 years that breakfast is the “most important meal of the day.” The problem is that it is not true

by

They’ve been hammering us with that slogan for so long that it should be true. That is, if from different speakers they proclaim that under no circumstances should we skip breakfast, it will be because it is lunch. most important of the day. But how we already pointed herethe studies on which they have relied to affirm this are conclusive. It also does not seem true that it is good to have breakfast to “start the day with energy”, nor that it reduces our appetite throughout the day. So who and why started proclaiming it? The history of breakfast is like many other social uses, something that has more to do with the roots of the context from which it came than with an innate need of our body to practice it. Several things came together between the 19th and 20th centuries so that breakfast became established as just another meal in Western societies. The first, the change of production model. Before, workers, mostly rural and dedicated to work in the fields, ate breakfast quickly whatever was out therelike last night’s leftovers. It wasn’t so much a meal as it was an appetizer. With the arrival of cities and the industrial revolution, work schedules were established. The workers, who spent the entire day working, saw the benefit of eating something before going to work. From 1822 onwards And here things started to get interesting. Progressively, the more money American workers were able to earn, they ate more meat. It was the star product to eat in the morning. They could prepare a meatloaf, a chicken or beef dish in the same way they would at lunch or dinner time. And all of this cooked with butter. The dyspepsia or indigestion became a public health problem on the level that obesity is now. The people of North America ate poorly, foods that were too heavy and altered their intestinal flow. People who needed to eat very well to go to work. The 19th century was also the time when western doctors They began to worry about nutritional health, germs and, later, vitamins. Thus, while the newspapers and magazines harshly criticized the problems caused by dyspepsiathe industry and the market naturally looked for a substitute. There came muesli and cereals, then minimally processed flour or corn that in many cases had to be soaked before consumption. The initial flavor and appearance of the cereals was that of military porridgebut they were attractive to a large part of the consumers: it seemed like a “health” productnot like those red meats that prevented good circulation. Furthermore, it was a food that I didn’t need to be preparedas easy as putting them together with a little milk so you can swallow them and go to work. Replacing big meals in the morning with a light product The health of the population improved, which is why many doctors and cereal merchants used this slogan to expand their consumption: breakfast is the most important meal of the dayand that is why you should take care of yourself early in the morning. Is practically the same idea of ​​health that whole grain houses continue to sell us so that we can lose weight. Corn flakes arrive Breakfast then began to be seen as the solution to all the problems. For the little ones, without a good breakfast they would not be able to reach their maximum level of effort at school. Also alcoholism It was caused by lack of food in the morning. According to certain prestigious doctors of the period, morning hunger encouraged the employee to begin to abuse the bottle until he became dependent on it. Some vendors went even further and talked about how their cereals They could cure malaria and appendicitis. Already then the cereal was promoted as “organic” foodAs we see today, some products are sold more expensive and not necessarily with better nutritional results. But the beneficial halo of the cereal remained and extended to the breakfast ritual, whether it was processed wheat, fruits or other foods. breakfast had come to stay. From the 19th and 20th centuries we move to the 21st century, when the saying, never sufficiently proven by science, has already been established as an immovable truth. Cereals have long been no longer tasteless porridge but small ones processed sugar balls in boxes with smiling animals that bill billions of dollars a year. And there is another agent that, for years, has been interested in making sure you remember that “breakfast is the most important meal of the day” and, therefore, eat quite well: fast food chains. Some essays have pointed out how the marketing of companies like McDonalds or Starbucks is being much more aggressive in morning products such as McMuffins or cheesecakes than in foods at lunch or dinner time. According to them, the new big dispute is here. While many workers have already decided on their meal locations, there is an increase in people who is going to breakfast at chains outside the house. And how mornings are the time for routinehumans tend to choose one place or another to have our breakfast and not leave the pattern except in case of emergency. If McDonalds gets you to go to their establishment in the morning, in a way you are marrying them gastronomically. And, well, you know, it’s the first meal, so it’s okay if it’s a little excessive, you’ll burn it off throughout the day (this, as we already explained, it is not completely contrasted). Thus, from a creditable beginning in which citizens’ nutrition was improved, we have moved to a point where the industry has been adapting to our tastes and modifying our diet to the point of harming us all. Although, if we think about it, the phrase is still as true now as it was 300 years ago: “breakfast is the most important meal of the day.” It is the most important. And the most discussed. In Xataka | We knew … Read more

The “my cat is fat” problem is so common that the industry has come up with an idea: “Ozempic for cats”

by

In just a few years, drugs such as Ozempic, Wegovy or Mounjaro have gone from being discreet treatments for diabetes to become a great social phenomenon. His promise—lose weight through a simple weekly injection—has opened a new chapter in human medicine. Now, this pharmacological revolution is beginning to expand beyond people: cats could be the next to receive an adapted version of these treatments. Goodbye fat cats. Okava Pharmaceuticals, a San Francisco company dedicated to chronic diseases in companion animals, has started a pioneering clinical trial called MEOW-1whose objective is to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of OKV-119, a subdermal implant capable of releasing exenatide—a GLP-1 agonist—sustained for months in overweight or obese cats. The intervention aims to simplify a treatment that, in humans, usually requires weekly injections. Here, everything comes down to a single gesture. “You insert the capsule under the skin, and six months later you come back, and the cat has lost weight. It’s like magic,” says Chen Gilor, the veterinarian responsible for the study. speaking to the New York Times. A pioneering study. Okava’s interests did not arise out of nowhere. Prior to MEOW-1, the company evaluated prototypes of the implant in two preliminary studies. A work published in Frontiers in Veterinary Science demonstrated that the OKV-119 implant could be easily implanted and removed, that it was well tolerated, and that its plasma levels of exenatide correlated with weight reduction in healthy cats for more than one month. Subsequently, research published in BMC Veterinary Research delved into this line: they implanted five cats with the designed prototype for 84 days, what they observed is that during that period stable levels of exenatide were maintained and four of them reduced at least 5% of their body weight, along with a lower caloric intake. These results motivated the move to a trial in real obese cats, which Okava plans to run this summer. According to the companyMEOW-1 will be the first formal feline weight loss study based on GLP-1 agonists. How does the implant work? OKV-119 uses the NanoPortal platformdeveloped by Vivani Medical. According to scientific studiesthis technology uses: a titanium reservoir, a membrane with nanotubes that regulate the passage of the drug, and a system designed to ensure a constant and prolonged release without pronounced peaks. Furthermore, this type of administration allows us to overcome the main difficulty associated with GLP-1 in veterinary medicine: lack of adherence. Studies indicate that giving repeated injections to a cat is complex, stressful and can drastically reduce the continuity of treatment, ithe same as what happens in people with injectable drugs. The implant seeks to solve that problem with an approach one-and-done: a subdermal insertion in a veterinary office, without daily intervention by the caregiver. According to The New York Timesthere are veterinarians who already use human GLP-1 agonists off-label in diabetic cats, but its cost and need for frequent administration limit its use. Hence the relevance of a device that could keep the medication active for half a year. But only in cats? Although MEOW-1 focuses exclusively on felines, Okava and Vivani have confirmed an expansion of the project to dogs, another species with obesity rates greater than 50% in the United States. The company states that its goal is to reproduce in dogs the metabolic effects observed in cats: improved insulin sensitivity, reduction in fat mass and greater energy efficiency. With the expectation that these changes may even promote healthier aging. With both markets, the commercial potential is evident. According to estimates collected in Xatakathe global human obesity drug sector could exceed $100 billion by 2030. Veterinary medicine would be a new frontier. Feline obesity is a global epidemic. The interest in an “Ozempic for cats” is not a whim. It is an answer to a growing problem. A review published in Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery places the prevalence of feline overweight between 40% and 63%, although it continues to increase. When you ask veterinariansthe same patterns almost always appear: cats that live exclusively indoors, very little movement, food available all day, too many treats, sterilization and a very common problem: many owners are not aware that their cat is gaining weight. The consequences are not minor: insulin resistance, diabetes, joint problems, urinary diseases, anesthetic complications and liver disorders, in addition to a reduction in life expectancy. And the latest evidence goes even further. A proteomic analysis that evaluated 288 proteins in cats with obesity found important changes in inflammatory processes, in the complement system, in coagulation pathways and in lipid metabolism. In other words, feline obesity affects the entire organism, it is not just a “fat cat.” Many open questions. Although MEOW-1 is moving forward with positive expectations, mass adoption of an “Ozempic for cats” is far from a fact. The first unknown is the price. In humans, GLP-1 cost several hundred euros a month, and it is not clear whether a semi-annual release veterinary implant will really be affordable for the majority of caregivers. Cost could become the main barrier to entry, especially considering that feline obesity is a common problem, but not always perceived as a health priority. The second uncertainty has to do with the available scientific evidence. So far, studies on OKV-119 have been preliminary and with extremely small samples (between 5 and 15 cats). They work, yes, but we still don’t know what will happen on a large scale, or how animals with diseases or in varied home environments will respond. Finally, there is the question of scientific independence. For now, all published studies on OKV-119 come from teams linked to Okava or Vivani, the companies developing the implant. There is no independent, large-scale evidence, and this matches a pattern already observed in human GLP-1where much of the initial research is driven by the industry itself. A new era in feline medicine? The questions surrounding this new milestone in the treatment of feline obesity are piling up: will these preliminary results be enough to justify regulatory approval? Will caregivers change … Read more

Huawei is building its own alternative ecosystem to CUDA. If it succeeds, NVIDIA will have a serious problem

by

When talking about NVIDIA, almost all the focus is on the hardware: the H100Blackwell, racksenergy consumption, nanometers… It is understandable, but it is a mistake. The defensive moat – the moat– NVIDIA is not the hardware. Is CUDA. CUDA is not an add-on to the chip, it is the de facto standard upon which most of the AI ​​code on the planet is written, optimized and debugged. Changing GPUs without changing CUDA does not exist. And switching from CUDA means rewriting years of work. That is why it is a moat. Why is it important. Huawei’s big bet is not to “make a Chinese H100.” It is to build a path for the developer to reach Ascend without feeling like you are changing planets. The restrictions are accelerating it. Exports have split the world in two: An ecosystem that revolves around NVIDIA. And another that China is trying to lift against the clock. In that second, Huawei is not just playing chips: is playing “ecosystem”in AI and outside of it. And therein lies the nuance: you can be years behind in chips and still reduce dependency if you get the software to swallow. In detail. Huawei is attacking the problem on three fronts, with a pragmatically Chinese logic: not to replace everything at once, but to open shortcuts. Native stack (CANN + MindSpore). It is your “pure” alternative: your own environment and your own tools to get the most out of Ascend. The cost today is high, there are complaints of instability, the documentation is rather messy, and the community is much smaller. PyTorch support. This is the most strategic move. Huawei does not try to make the world love its framework– Try to ensure that the world doesn’t have to leave PyTorch. torch_npu acts as an adapter to run PyTorch models on Ascend, but with one problem: it is not native and suffers with every PyTorch change. If PyTorch advances and your backend lags behind, the developer notices. Portability via ONNX. Here Huawei looks for its best window: inference and deployment, not training. ONNX works as a bridge format: you train where you can (often NVIDIA) and deploy to Ascend. It’s a less romantic and more useful approach: if shortages hit, moving inference to local hardware is an immediate relief. Between the lines. The real story is that Huawei is trying to replicate the “trick” that made NVIDIA great: turning its hardware into an experience. That’s why the tactic that explains everything appears: putting engineers in the client’s home to migrate code and optimize it. It is not scalable as a business model, but it is scalable as a transition model: you buy time while you mature tools, libraries and support. And there is another derivative: if China gets enough teams to adopt Ascend out of necessity, over time that can become habit and then infrastructure. Not because it is better, but because it is already integrated. Yes, but. Huawei has two limits that cannot be fixed with marketing: Hardware improvement rate: Roadmap analysis suggests relative stagnation and a gap that could widen, not close, if NVIDIA continues to accelerate cycles. Off-chip bottlenecks: memory (HBM), tools and industrial capacity. You can add “worse” chips, but you need to make a lot of them and build a lot of systems. And now what. If this movie continues, we will see two clear signs: Less hype of chips and more real migration stories: how many computers have moved to Ascendwith what frictions, with what performance losses. Less obsession with training in Ascend and more normalization of the hybrid pattern: I train where I can, I deploy where I must. NVIDIA will continue to be CUDA. Huawei is not “a chip.” It is an escape strategy. And the restrictions are the fuel that is making it inevitable. In Xataka | With HarmonyOS NEXT Huawei has achieved something incredible. Neither Samsung, Microsoft nor Mozilla achieved it Featured image | NVIDIA, Huawei

La Niña is going to be meteorologically “less intense” than we expected. And that actually hides a problem.

by

There is a 55% chance that the world will cross the La Niña thresholds in the coming weeks. And although The World Meteorological Organization insists that it will probably be a weak and brief episode, that does not mean that it will not cause us problems. Many problems, in fact. First because it is going to catch us with a changed pace. When world meteorological agencies indicate that La Niña will be low in intensity, what they are also doing (often inadvertently) is telling authorities that it won’t be that bad. And that is technically true, but socially speaking it is a mistake. WMO A global event… Let us remember that, with the exception of the seasons, ENSO (of which La Niña is a phase) constitutes the most important source of annual climate variability from all over the planet. It is true that the cold phase usually has less impact than the warm one, but the teleconnections of The Girl They are still huge and so is their impact. …with an impact worthy of its size. In fact, under “normal conditions”, with a 55% chance of it arriving this quarter, many countries would be preparing for its consequences. Above all, because, under “normal conditions”, there are many: For example, in the southeast of the American continent temperatures become warmer than normal. Likewise, they get colder in the Northeast. Less rainfall than normal is expected in Ecuador and Peru, and torrential rains are expected in Northeast Brazil. In Mexico, it is common for La Niña to cause (or make more intense) drought in the north and center of the country, while increasing torrential rainfall in the Pacific, the southern Gulf of Mexico and the Yucatan Peninsula. In Spain, for its part, it is usually synonymous with less rain. In other words, bad news. But we are not in “normal conditions.” As I say, the WMO messages they are precise; but they act as confusing signals: the administrations are not preparing. And that, whether we want it or not, can turn even the most lukewarm of Las Niñas into thousands of problems on a regional scale. But we must also take into account the global scenario. Because, as the WMO also points outLa Niña may bring slight global cooling. However, this should not motivate a reduction in efforts against climate change: the accumulated warming is so great that temperatures will most likely remain above average. That is, climate change is still underway. And, unlike other years, not even La Niña can do anything to contain it. Image | Climate Reanalyzer In Xataka | 2023 was the year in which El Niño and climate change competed. In the Amazon we already know who won

Silver is right now the most sought after and most expensive metal on the planet. And the problem is that there is not enough

by

Silver just surpassed $60 per ounce for the first time, and the impact is especially noticeable in the technology sector. The metal is essential for solar panels, electric cars, electronics and AI data centers, and demand has skyrocketed much faster than the mining industry can respond. In a matter of months, what seemed like a one-time rally has revealed a deeper problem: the world is entering a phase of real silver shortage. A record that marks a turning point. The escalation became historic this week. While this report is being written, silver is around $62.67 per ouncedoubling its value since January after five consecutive years of supply deficit. Although the rise is not surprising who follows this marketwhat impacts is its speed: according to Bloombergsilver is the best performing metal of the year, doubling its price and even surpassing gold in what is already its biggest increase in decades. But beyond the price, what is relevant is not how much silver has become more expensive, but why. The market structure has changed. Money doesn’t stop going up. For analysts and companies, this new peak has profound implications. Silver no longer behaves as a simple safe haven asset, it is a critical industrial input whose shortage can slow down entire sectors of the global economy. Unlike goldwhose function is mainly financial—, the silver it is a metal that supports electrification and the energy transition. However, the problem is amplified by the nature of the market which is narrow, volatile and without global strategic reserves. As Bloomberg recallsthere is no equivalent to gold central banks that act as a stabilizer of last resort. When physical money is lacking, there is simply no safety net. Source: TradingView A perfect storm. The rise of silver is not understood by a single factor, but by the convergence of industrial, monetary and geopolitical forces. First of all, according to Financial Timesthe silver market has been in deficit for five years, with inventories at minimum levels and production unable to respond. Silver is mostly obtained as a byproduct of zinc, copper or lead mining, making it difficult to increase supply quickly. Furthermore, the three largest producers—Mexico, Peru and China— face environmental and regulatory restrictions which further reduce production capacity. The Silver Institute foresees industrial demand increasing at least until 2030, driven by solar expansion, transportation electrification and the growth of digital infrastructure. Additionally, the global data center boom also adds to this pressure, because some of them operate with solar energy. Added to all this is a worrying dynamic: the United States has accumulated large reserves of silver due to the risk of new tariffs under Section 232. This diversion of metal to American deposits has drained inventories in London and Asia, generating a silver squeeze which skyrocketed metal borrowing costs. As pointed out in FTthe North American retail investor—for whom silver is “the poor man’s gold”—is also entering aggressively, fueling the bullish momentum. China enters the scene. The decisive factor comes from Beijing. The Ministry of Commerce of China announced in an official statement new strict conditions for exports of silver, tungsten and antimony during 2026–2027, including strengthened requirements, documentary controls and more rigorous supervision for state-owned companies that want to export metal. Likewise, the official text confirms China’s intention to protect its strategic resources for internal use, especially in sectors considered critical for its future competitiveness: renewable energy and artificial intelligence. The reason it’s clear: China wants to guarantee enough physical silver to power its own AI data centers, the expansion of which requires huge volumes of solar panels. With global mining production limited to 813 million ounces annually and new projects that take years to come online, Chinese controls could exacerbate an already structural shortage. China, the largest global refiner of silver and a central player in the solar chain, has real capacity to alter the global balance of the market. India and Russia complete the geopolitical map. On the one hand, India has become one of the great drivers of the physical silver market, with about 80% of global demand for bars and coins. According to ReutersIndian demand for jewelry and bullion has been so strong in 2025 that it has caused physical shortages and premiums on international prices during holidays such as Diwali. Added to this pressure is a new regulatory framework: India’s silver imports soared to $2.72 billion in October, partly due to measures that facilitate the monetization of physical silver, allowing consumers to convert their holdings into financial instruments. On the other hand, Russia decided at the end of 2024 start buying silver for its State Reserve Fund, a move that has contributed to skyrocketing prices against gold even further. It’s not just silver: a global reconfiguration of metals. The rise in silver coincides with a historic movement in gold. The golden metal exceeded $4,200 due to pressure from central banks, which already have more value in gold than in US Treasury bonds. A structural turn in the international monetary system. For their part, platinum and palladium have also become more expensive. This phenomenon indicates that strategic and safe haven metals are regaining a central role in the global economy. What to expect from now on. The forecasts for the coming months coincide in a common diagnosis: structural tension will not disappear, even if phases of technical correction appear. On a technical level, several analysts see room for further increases. According to FXStreetconsiders an advance towards 63.8–65 dollars plausible, supported by a weak dollar and the continuity of the buying impulse. However, since the TradersUnion portal introduce caution, the market is clearly overbought, and losing the $61.5 support could trigger short-term profit taking. Added to all this are two new forces compared to past cycles: the rise of AI, which multiplies solar demand, and China’s industrial policy, which can further restrict global supply. In this context, as analyst David Morgan warnsprecious metals are entering “a monetary inflection point,” driven by both the energy transition and loss of confidence in … Read more

AVLO’s departure from Madrid-Barcelona seemed like another problem for Renfe. He has left us an unexpected winner

by

August 2025. The summer had started out average for Renfe and ended even worse. After an exchange of information, Renfe accepted that some Talgo AVRIL trains had suffered cracks in their structures and that they were being taken out of circulation, with the consequent suspension of service. And, of course, that has had consequences for travelers. Goodbye AVLO, goodbye. Everything ended up precipitating in the last days of August but the origin must be sought a few days before. At the end of July, Renfe paralyzed by surprise the sale of tickets for the AVLO service. The news was given from The Economist: AVLO trains had suffered cracks in their cars on the Madrid-Barcelona line. A few days later, Renfe confirmed this fact and began to apply a temporary solution. The idea is that the trains would continue running but reducing traffic speed there where it was believed that the trains had cracked. Some leaked photos Already in August they demonstrated the seriousness of the events. Renfe decided withdraw AVRIL trains of the service. And days later he ended up suspending the AVLOs. September. It was a strange month for Renfe. The company maintained the AVLO service in the early stages, but in the absence of finding a solution, it ended up canceling. relocate passengers of the service low cost of the company on the AVE. That is, a kind of upgrade to travelers who already had their ticket for beyond September 8. That put the company in trouble. Or at least that was the first reading. Since then Renfe does not compete directly against Ouigo and Iryo. Without a cheaper service, the Spanish company was left without the possibility of competing directly against foreign companies. However, it does not appear to have directly affected their results. How has it affected Renfe? If we take into account the latest data from the CNMCwhich refer to the months of July, August and September, we could say nothing or very little. Renfe Viajeros (which adds data from AVLO and AVE) has increased its occupancy by 4%, the number of travelers has increased by 0.6% and they have increased the use of rolling stock by 1.6%. Regarding prices, Renfe has also won. And the company has managed to increase the number of travelers despite an obvious increase in ticket prices. The AVE cost 70.58 euros on average, 13.3% more than in the same period last year and AVLO went to 51.35 euros, repeating the same growth. Retail. But what interests us most about this period is how prices behaved when AVLO was not available. In the month of September, AVLO prices dropped but let’s remember that they were only available for very few days. Instead, Renfe only offered AVE tickets. And they were shot. In September, service prices premium increased to 75.11 euros. It is 11.4% more than the previous month. But above all, it is a price 17.4% higher than that of the same month in 2024 when there were four companies available on the market. Beyond Renfe. Curiously, the one who performed the most in this case has not been Renfe. Iryo is the company that has increased prices the most in this period. With an average ticket price of 63.82 euros, the company seemed to have positioned itself between Ouigo and Renfe, offering an alternative halfway between both services. However, the absence of AVLO in the month of September must have triggered the demand for Ouigo and Iryo. This is the only way to explain why the Italian company raised the prices of its routes to 74.13 euros in that month, just one euro less than the AVE. Year-on-year growth that month reached 83.5%. For its part, Ouigo also raised prices but remained on a somewhat more contained line. In the quarter, the average ticket price was 51.86 euros, which already represents a growth of 20% compared to the previous year. In September, however, prices remained at 52.20 euros, slightly below the month of August but, yes, 30% more expensive than in September 2024. The complete photograph. Expanding on everything that happened, as expected, AVLO’s departure from the Madrid-Barcelona corridor has only increased prices. It is something that we were already beginning to suspect and that was logical if we take into account that it is the corridor with the highest occupation and use of the line. In fact, the latter exceeds 84% ​​and remains around 10% above any other high-speed corridor with liberalized services. It is the perfect environment for passengers dynamic prices suffer. Photo | Xataka and Logan Armstrong In Xataka | Renfe is selling its AVLO for 7 euros in Andalusia: it is the new battlefield in the price war against Ouigo and Iryo

There are dozens of influencers obsessed with helping us choose the perfect can of tuna. The problem is that what they say doesn’t make much sense.

by

There is a fine line that connects volcanic eruptions, oil combustion, and waste incineration with our kitchens: mercury. A mercury that is produced in dozens of activities (mostly human), which ends up deposited in the waters, transformed into methylmercury by millions of microorganisms, stored in fish and, finally, in our stomach. It was only a matter of time before it became the huge food scandal it is today. Methylmercury also reaches social networks. The problem is so big that there is no shortage of experts and influencers that defend messages such as choosing cans of “tuna” over cans of “light tuna.” The music is that of institutions such as the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) that recommends avoiding large fish; The lyrics hide many problems. At the end of the day, the viral message mixes correct intuitions, with more than debatable scientific evidence (it uses, to begin with, commercial classifications that do not have direct Spanish correspondence). This is not the first time that an idea that sounds good ends up giving us headaches. And why is that a problem? Because, like it or not, fish is a centerpiece of many diets. Not only for its protein contribution, but as a priority source of certain fats that are very difficult to replace by any other means (e.g. omega-3). The thing is, with all that, comes methylmercury. And exposure to methylmercury is a tricky thing: it can harm brain development and be toxic to the nervous system. In fact, it can cause symptoms such as tremors, memory loss, and cognitive dysfunctions. The most vulnerable groups are pregnant women, nursing mothers, babies and young children. Do all fish have the same amount of mercury? No, it doesn’t. According to the Spanish Agency for Food Safety and Nutritionthere are four really dangerous species: the swordfish or emperor, the bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus), the shark (dogfish, mako shark, dogfish, dogfish and blue shark) and pike. These are problematic in women who are pregnant or planning to be pregnant, nursing mothers and children under 10 years of age. In fact, AESAN recommends directly avoid its consumption. The rest of the species are not problematic for the effects of mercury: they are safe and healthy. And the AESAN recommends between three and four servings a week even in the at-risk population. And aren’t there more differences according to levels? That is, are there only dangerous and non-dangerous species? No no. It is true that each species contains a different amount of mercury. In fact, each copy has different levels. That’s where the problem comes from: we need simple ‘rules’ to help us deal with uncertainty. On a practical level, according to the available studies, we can only define species with low mercury content as those on this list: Pollock, Anchovy, Herring, Cod, Bacaladilla, Cockle, Mackerel, Squid, Shrimp, Crab, Cane, Coquina, Carp, Squid, Clam, Choco/Cuttlefish, Lobster, Coquina, Sea bream, Sprat, Prawn, Horse mackerel, Lobster, Prawn, European sole, Dab, Sea bass, Mussel, Merlan, Hake, Razor clam, Oyster, Pomfret, Flounder, Squid, Octopus, Shrimp, Atlantic salmon, Pacific salmon, Sardine, Sardinella, Sardinopa, Plaice, and Trout. Everything else has medium levels and making distinctions between them is impossible on a practical level. So it doesn’t make sense to follow these types of recommendations? In general, any attention we pay to food is good. The system is configured in such a way that, if we let ourselves goour diet gets worse. However, we know that Obsessing over diet is also full of problems.. Using heuristics that complicate the purchase without substantial improvements is not as good an idea as it seems. Image | Tobias Tullius In Xataka | The scientific reason why miracle diets don’t work is you

In the search for a supersonic train, China tests a Maglev that will reach 4,000 km/h. The problem will be maintaining it

by

China’s conquest of the high-speed train field is impressive. In the 2008 Beijing Olympicsthe country had just 120 kilometers of high speed between Beijing and Tianjin. 17 years latermanage more high-speed kilometers than any other countrya very long distance from Spain or Japan. They are not only building kilometers to unite the entire country: they are developing technologies so that the plane is no longer necessary. As? With Maglev trains at speeds of 1,000 km/h. And a specific model, the T-Flight, which dreams of 4,000 km/h. Maglev + Hyperloop. China is one of the countries, along with Japan, that is investing a lot of money in the development of the magnetic levitation trainsor Maglev. This technology allows trains not to rest their wheels on the rails, but rather to float thanks to a series of powerful magnets and an electromagnetic field. This allows us to exceed the 250 km/h that has been set as a standard for high speed and, for example, China has the fastest Maglev in the worldone that reaches 431 km/h. It is already operational between Beijing and Shanghai, but in Japan is testing one that will exceed 600 km/h. It’s a speed that will seem slow compared to what CASIC is preparing. It stands for “China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation,” a state-owned tactical missile company that announced the T-Flight project in August 2017. The idea? Combine magnetic levitation trains with Hyperloop-style vacuum tubes. T-Flight. In short, it is putting a Maglev in a vacuum tube, eliminating air pressure and resistance as much as possible, but there is much more. For example, the idea of CASIC is that magnetic levitation is enhanced thanks to superconductors that will raise the train up to 100 mm above the rail. Conventional Maglevs are raised by about 10 mm, and the idea is that the higher the train is, the more stability it will have at extreme speeds. On the other hand, the tube itself, with a system that extracts air from it to create a low pressure environment, reducing aerodynamic resistance to the maximum. This partial vacuum and levitation that eliminates the physical resistance of the wheel and track is what will allow unprecedented speeds to be achieved. Achievements. In 2024 they already achieved one first validated test as a world record by reaching 623 km/h, but in the summer of this year, in a low pressure environment, The train reached 650 km/h in seven seconds in its laboratory. They were strange tests, since the track was a kilometer long when the usual thing is much longer, but that also gives us a clue of what brutal which is both the acceleration and braking of the train. That is, think that, in seven seconds and in just one kilometer, the train accelerated to 650 km/h and stopped. The team’s idea is to reach 800 km/h as the top speed this year, but the ambition goes much further. Ambition. Currently, the team is in Phase 1, which is the one that aims aim that speed of 1,000 km/h. To do this, and to validate the speed in real conditions, they want to extend the test track to 60 kilometers. However, the thing does not stop there and, when the project was born, it was already said that Phase 2 and Phase 3 would have as aim 2,000 km/h (almost double the cruising speed of a traditional commercial airplane) and 4,000 km/hsupersonic speeds that would compete with the fastest planes in the world. This would allow large urban centers in China to be linked in a few minutes, leaving aside the need to take planes to cover long distances. In fact, this high speed is already showing in Europe that short flights do not make sense if we combine the waiting time at the airport with the flight itself and compare it with the comfort of access to the train. A major challenge. Now, the goal will not be easy. Maglev technology works and is proven, but what they want to achieve with this T-Flight not only complicates things because, in addition to a track, a tube must be built. And, of course, maintain it. Extending this partial vacuum over hundreds of kilometers of tube represents an enormous technical challenge because it implies that the joints must be perfectly sealed, without the cold and heat dilating them so that there are no leaks. It is estimated that a 600 km pipe requires an expansion joint every 100 meters, and each one of them represents a potential point of failure. Furthermore, at 300 km/h appreciate vibrations in the seats. Air system to reduce pressure inside the tubes Furthermore, any decompression would be catastrophic and perhaps most importantly: there is no certification standard or safety protocols for something like this. In any case, T-Flight continues to take steps at a good pace and, although it seems difficult to see it working in the short term, if a country can achieve it right now… it is China. Images | Geely In Xataka | After 20 years, the definitive one arrives: Brazil prepares the first high-speed train in South America

The meteorological winter has already begun for the AEMET. And now we have another problem with the DGT beacons

by

The State Meteorological Agency (AEMET) has not waited for the solstice to start winter. A season that, meteorologically speaking, extends from December 1 to February 28. Three months of cold await us (although less and less)rain, snow and various inclemencies. This year, it is inevitable to ask ourselves if the cold may affect the V16 beacons of the DGT. The answer is a resounding yes. Resistance up to -10ºC. All approved V16 beacons must have with a series of requirements. And one of them talks precisely about resistance. There are two things to keep in mind here: the IP rating and what temperature range they can operate in. New connected beacons must have at least IP54 certification. That is, resistance to dust and splashes of water. But they must also offer adequate operation within a wide range of temperatures. Specifically, between -10ºC and 50ºC. It is enough even If we leave the car in full sun in summerbut in winter it gets a little more complicated. BUT. Theoretically, Spain is not a very cold country. But although it is not at the level of the Nordic countries, in certain places or times the thermometer can fall below -10ºC. If we are going skiing, if we are driving on a mountain road on a particularly cold day or if we are considering a getaway to one of the “refrigerators from Spain”things get complicated. For example, Molina de Aragón (Guadalajara) is considered the coldest town in Spain and has the milestone of having reached -28.2 degrees. In these types of places and situations, the resistance to -10ºC of the beacons is insufficient, so their connectivity may stop working, thus losing virtual visibility, or even fail to turn on. Another problem: snow. Beyond the problems caused by extreme temperatures, there is another phenomenon that in the winter season can interfere with the beacons. Much has been said about the visibility problems of these devices in broad daylight, in fog or on very tight curves, but snow can also become another obstacle. Beacons should be placed on the highest part of the vehicle where possible, usually the roof. If the snow settles, it can cover it and thus kill the physical visibility it provides us. The alternative. The V16 beacons aim to improve safety on the roads, warning other drivers of the obstacle posed by a car stopped on them. In the event that the beacon does not work due to problems with temperatures or snow, the option left is to contact the emergency services via mobile phone. The V16 beacons, which will be mandatory from January 1, 2026, are not without controversy. From the scams around them until accusations from groups of the Civil Guardthe DGT He had to admit his mistakes and has already explained that will be flexible with fines. Cover image | Generated with Gemini In Xataka | FACUA believes that a lot of V16 beacons “approved by the DGT” are not legal. And there’s a way to sum it up: fraud. In Xataka | Living 1,300 kilometers from the North Pole: a Catalan tells of his experience in the northernmost city in the world

AI needs 650 billion a year to sustain itself. The problem is who will put them on the table

by

Those responsible for the JPMorgan banking entity they have done numbers. For AI companies to achieve a 10% return on their capital expenditure In 2030, they will need to collectively earn $650 billion. That’s like saying that the 1.4 billion iPhone users will pay $400 a year to use those models. It’s not impossible, but certainly it doesn’t seem simple. Many use it, few pay. Above all, because today the number of paying users is very small. According to the data from the consulting firm Menlo Venturestoday 1.8 billion people use AI around the world, but only 3% of them (54 million) are paying customers of some subscription. ChatGPT as an example. OpenAI esteem that in 2030 that percentage will rise to 8.5% for its user base, which they project will be 2.6 billion a week. That is to say: 220 million people will be subscribed to one of ChatGPT’s payment plans, which will probably have different prices than the current ones in 2030. They do not seem sufficient, at least a priori, to make the firm profitable as promised. Advertisements. It is more than likely that the advertisements they end up being the other great resource to earn revenue from AI models. Although Sam Altman indicated in the past that advertising would be “the last resort” to monetize, recent data reveal that those ads are about to be part of the user experience on ChatGPT. A very risky bet. JPMorgan’s estimate points to a future in which billions of people will pay a lot of money a year to use the best AI. Apple account with 1 billion subscribers to its services, Netflix with 300Spotify with about 280and Google account with 150 million subscribers on Google One alone. It is evident that there are many users willing to pay for services that are useful and entertaining. The question is whether AI will be for so many people. And AI companies, of course, are confident that they do. The non-surprise of the bubble. In The Economist indicate that a potential explosion of the AI bubble already it’s not going to surprise anyone. The curious thing is that there is no excessively notable concern for the consequences. In recent years the economy seems to have recovered surprisingly well from disasters such as the European energy crisis after the start of the Ukrainian War or the tariffs imposed by the US. Recessions, this economic newspaper points out, they are becoming rarer. Everyone has jumped on the bandwagon. Mass vulnerability exists, however. Stocks today represent 21% of Americans’ economic wealth —more than in the dotcom bubble—, and investment in AI companies is responsible for half of the increase in that wealth over the past year. And therein lies the danger. Recession in sight? People have earned more money and saved less: if the bubble bursts in a similar way to what it did with dotcoms, The Economist believes that net worth will fall by 8%. That in turn would cause a notable decrease in consumer spending. It is estimated that the US GDP would decline by 1.6%, enough to push the country into recession. The difference with dotcoms. In this case that global recession It might not be so deep for a clear reason: the root would be in the investment markets, and therefore it could be overcome with a little more room for maneuver. Central banks could cut interest rates to boost consumption, a good thing on that front but dangerous for vulnerable economies. The shock wave of the explosion. If the bubble bursts, what could also occur is a painful reconfiguration of global trade. Lower US demand would reduce its trade deficit, but would worsen the excess China production capacity. By not being able to sell (as much) to the US, it would flood other markets with its products, which would probably cause some protectionism in Europe and Asia. The world is preparing for the stock market crash, but not so much for the economic and geopolitical consequences that will follow. In Xataka | OpenAI has no problem inflating the AI ​​bubble – it has a problem with it bursting too soon

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.