scientific

The scientific explanation behind summer lipothymia

by

With the arrival of heat waves, streets, beaches and public transport become a perfect breeding ground for a horrible fainting or heat stroke to occur. Something that is not too isolated, since only in 2025 were high temperatures behind 3,832 deaths in Spaina number that tragically exceeds those killed in traffic accidents. An emergency. Many of these heat-related problems start with something that can go unnoticed, such as heat syncope or lipothymiawhich presents as dizziness with blurred vision and, in a matter of seconds, total disconnection. Given this, the question is obligatory: what exactly happens in our body that makes our brain decide to “turn off”? The reason. To understand why we faint, we have to go to the European Society of Cardiology, which in your official guide defines syncope as a temporary loss of consciousness due to less blood flow reaching the brain for a few moments. To understand it, when we are exposed to high temperatures, the human body activates its basic cooling mechanism, which is the dilation of its blood vessels. The goal here is to dissipate heat and cool us down, and that’s why it’s easy to see how people turn red in the heat and also feel weaker from the drop in blood pressure. And there is more. If we add to this drop in tension the stress of standing for a long time without moving or dehydration, blood tends to accumulate in the legs due to the effect of gravity. This causes the heart to not be able to pump enough blood upwards and the brain, being momentarily deprived of oxygen and nutrients, activates its emergency system, which is fainting. When falling to the ground, the horizontal position cancels the effect of gravity, allowing blood flow to return to the brain and the person to regain consciousness. Different terms. One of the most common mistakes is to put all the health problems that they cause us in the same bag and it is important to differentiate them in the following three situations: Heat syncope: It is a brief fainting due to the “sequestration” of blood in the extremities due to vasodilation and dehydration, and which does not usually leave serious consequences if there is no serious contusion and recovery is rapid. Heat exhaustion: This is a systemic condition that occurs when the body loses a lot of fluid through sweat. It is characterized by extreme weakness, nausea, headache and sweaty skin, but with the difference that there is no serious neurological alteration. Heat stroke: This is a vital medical emergency that threatens a person’s life, since the body’s thermostat collapses. In this situation, the core temperature reaches or exceeds 40°C and severe nervous system dysfunction occurs with delirium, seizures, and even coma. The risk factors. There is a large cocktail of situations that predispose us to some of these situations, such as For example, heavy meals. After a summer feast, the body redirects a large amount of blood flow to the digestive system to process the food. With the vessels already dilated by the heat, the brain is left with a very narrow margin of blood supply. This means that a little physical activity here can lead to dizziness or fainting, making light meals almost an obligation in summer. Age is also important to take into account, since the people most vulnerable to any of these medical situations are those over 65 years of age. And it is only because aging attenuates the thirst reflex and slows down the body’s vasomotor response, which causes many people to become dehydrated without ever feeling the need to ask for a glass of water. The recommendations. To avoid reaching a situation of this type, it is important to maintain good hydration throughout the day, emphasizing vulnerable people who should drink despite not being thirsty. Additionally, avoid going outside during critical hours of the day with higher temperatures or have light meals to avoid straining the body much more in the face of high temperatures. Images | Gerardo Ramirez Lopez In Xataka | We have been cooling homes for decades with increasingly expensive machines. The Persian method has not consumed a single watt for 2,500 years

There is a scientific scale to measure how much you enjoy watching pimples explode and many people have high scores

by

The paths of the Internet are inscrutable. Sometimes, the videos that set trends on social networks are more than understandable. For example, who isn’t going to like kitten videos? However, on other occasions, there are videos that divide society. It is the case of the videos of exploding pimples. For some users, they are as pleasurable as exploiting them in person. For others, precisely those who can’t stand it in real life either, they are the height of unpleasantness. But what is it about the act of popping pimples or seeing it on the screen? Why are there so many people who enjoy it? Actually, with psychology in hand, it is not so strange. The problem is that, if we change psychology for dermatology, it can be dangerous in some cases. Although not as much as we think Why do we enjoy popping pimples so much? For starters, our penchant for popping pimples is related to dopamine. Humans experience pleasure when a surge of dopamine is released in our brain. In reality it is a much more complex process, but we can keep that in a simplified way. It is the hormone that dominates reward systems. That is, those who They are set in motion when we do something that is beneficial to us as a species. For example, sex is beneficial, because it helps us perpetuate the species. Eating chocolate is beneficial because it gives us energy. The brain does not distinguish between energetic and healthy, so it also generates that feeling of pleasure that makes us want to repeat. If we have a lot of sex it will be easier for us to reproduce and if we eat a lot of chocolate we will have a lot of energy. That’s the summary of how reward systems work. Unfortunately, not everything that activates reward systems is always good. Drugs, for example, can replicate that feeling of pleasure, despite not providing us with any benefit. Leaving that aside, stopping feeling pain also gives us pleasure, logically. It’s good for us. Furthermore, from a much more superficial point of view, what is beautiful and aesthetic is equally pleasant. For that reason, there are people who get so much pleasure from exploding pimples. With a single gesture of her nails, they are removing something painful and unsightlyso they get a good shot of dopamine. What about the videos? The case of videos that circulate on social networks is not exactly the same. There we are only spectators. We are not directly exploiting the pimples. Even so, just take a look at the visualizations to see that they cause a sensation. A feeling that, in fact, is not new. In 2021 already There was a team of Austrian scientists who were interested in the reasons why so many people enjoy these types of videos. They carried out an investigation with 80 women, of which 38 reported that they enjoyed these videos and 42 indicated that they did not. Their brains were analyzed using functional magnetic resonance imaging while they watched several of these videos, so it was observed that, indeed, those who enjoyed them showed greater activity in brain regions associated with pleasurelike the nucleus accumbens. Later, in 2024, these same scientists They developed scales that they called the Grain Exploitation Enjoyment Scale. (PPES) to evaluate people who enjoy this guilty pleasure. The study was carried out through two experiments. In the first, 104 people participated and were asked questions aimed at evaluating the PPES scale. In addition, they were made to watch videos of people exploiting pimples, with complete freedom to move the video forward or backward if they saw it necessary. Thus, the scale was found to be appropriate, since higher scores corresponded to a lower probability of forwarding the video. Many people watch videos of exploding pimples because of the controlled risk Then, with the scale already evaluated, a second experiment was done, this time with 501 people, who were asked questions to score through the PPES scale, but also through other personality scales. The objective was to check what type of traits lead someone to enjoy these videos. Thus, it was seen that, mainly, people with higher PPES scores are those who feel pleasure with situations of possible death or discomfort in controlled and non-threatening situations. It should be said that this does not mean that possible death is pleasurable, but the adrenaline of risky situations does, when seen from the outside, without real danger. People who enjoy these situations also tend to be lovers of horror movies, for example. To a certain extent, this human tendency is also linked to the survival of the species. Enjoyment in risky situations leads us to observe them conscientiously and learn in case, when the time comes, we find ourselves in a similar scenario in real life. It is true that exploding pimples is not fatal, but it does pose a certain risk, so seeing it from the outside, in a controlled way, can cause a feeling of pleasure. If we add the dopamine from seeing something unsightly removed, we can understand the fury of these viral videos. What are the risks of popping pimples? We have seen that people who enjoy pimple popping videos do so because they see a certain dangerous situation. It is not doing bungee jumping, but it has its risk. Now, to what extent is it dangerous? To find out, I have contacted Rosa Tabernerdermatologist at the Son Llátzer Hospital (Palma de Mallorca) and member of the Spanish Association of Dermatology and Venereology. To begin with, he explained something very interesting to me: the reason why in viral videos (and in reality) you see those yellow threads when removing the pimple. The key is in the keratin that accumulates in the pores of the skin. “Pimples or blackheads correspond to what dermatologists call open comedones,” he begins. “When this opening is more dilated than normal and sebum secretion is increased, keratin accumulates in that pore.” Keratin … Read more

We have been told that drinking water on an empty stomach helps you lose weight. Scientific evidence says otherwise

by

The Internet and social networks are full of supposedly easy tricks that promise almost miraculous results with a minimum effort for our body. One of these tricks is a habit that many people do as if it were a ritual: drinking a large glass of water, “yes or yes”, as soon as we get out of bed in the morning. This simple gesture promises to ‘wake up’ the intestines, activate the metabolism and promote weight loss. It’s a myth. What we hear on social networks is not always true, since we must face a large number of myths that have no scientific support behind them. And right now the best scientific evidence does not support this idea, Although it is true that drinking water increases our energy production. Thermogenesis. To understand where this widespread myth comes from, we must analyze the term “water-induced thermogenesis”, that is, the ability of our body to begin producing energy after drinking a glass of water. Here is a classic study In the medical literature it was observed that the consumption of 500 ml of water managed to increase the metabolic rate by around 30% during a period of 30 to 40 minutes. But although this percentage may seem incredible, the reality is that the acceleration of the metabolism translated into a total expenditure of 24 kilocalories. That is to say, its effect was so small that short-term weight loss was hardly going to be noticed due to this. It has been verified. Subsequent research in the fields of endocrinology and nutrition has attempted to replicate these data in different contexts. We have one of the examples in a clinical trial that evaluated the physiological effects in overweight or obese people, where an increase in energy expenditure of 24% was found for 60 minutes after ingesting 500 ml of water. But again it was seen that this slight temporary metabolic rebound does not imply a fat loss that is relevant in itself. On the scale. If now, instead of staying in the laboratory, we go to the real effect that this habit has on patients, we find that the narrative of water on an empty stomach as a slimming remedy loses much of its support, since the scientific evidence on weight loss attributable to water consumption is, in general terms, limited and of low to moderate quality. And the studies that have been done, despite pointing to weight loss, have a follow-up that is too short and a methodology that prevents giving a firm conclusion about applying this recommendation. The power of water. That dismantling the myth of a glass of water on an empty stomach is anticlimactic does not mean that hydration has no value in a weight control strategy. And the evidence suggests that drinking water helps to lose weight indirectly, since the mere fact of modifying the diet to go from a high consumption of sugary soft drinks or industrial juices to drinking water eliminates hundreds of calories a day with little effort. In addition, various trials suggest that drinking water before meals makes us feel full much sooner, which will reduce the amount of calories that we end up eating and, therefore, advancing a little further in the diet. Images | engin akyurt In Xataka | We believed that with Ozempic, people who lost weight exercised more. we believed wrong

“Treating scientific opinion as pro or con is oversimplifying”

by

Does it exist extraterrestrial life? Yes or no?. We often think that science evolves based on strong and solid statements. We have the perception that there is absolute agreement among all scientists in the world. “Science says so.” Thus, as if all scientists had a hive mind. However, those who rely on categorical statements, without asking questions, are characters like Marcos Llorentewith his yellow glasses and his fear of water vapor. Scientific knowledge, on the other hand, evolves through uncertainty and consensus that can change as research continues. This is what a team of scientists from Durham University is studying with their project C-SCOPE (Center for the Survey and Evaluation of Opinion of the Scientific Community). Its objective is precisely to understand how much consensus there is in some of the most important disciplines of science. Astrophysics is usually one that generates the most doubts among its own researchers, as well was seen in a recently published study. For this reason, they wanted to go further and analyze the opinion of hundreds of astrobiologists regarding the idea that extraterrestrial life exists. Two milestones about extraterrestrial life. These surveys were made in 2025, after two important studies were published pointing to a possible discovery of extraterrestrial life. The first of these studies was carried out with data from exoplanet K2-18bin which traces of dimethylsulfides and dimethyldisulfides were found, both substances that on Earth are related to biological activity. The second, however, took place much closeron Mars. In a rock on the red planet called Cheyava Falls, structures known as leopard spots were identified, which on our planet are related to microbial activity. When asking hundreds of astrobiologists about each of these studies, opinion was very divided. Of course, it seemed that there were a little less doubts with the second. The data. Regarding extraterrestrial life on K2-18b, 6.6% of those surveyed agreed to make this hypothesis, while 65.4% disagreed and 28% pointed to neutrality. Regarding the Martian rock, 15.1% of astrobiologists showed agreement, 44.6% disagreement and 40.3% neutrality. Among those who showed disagreement, they were also asked if it was a categorical disagreement or with some reluctance. In the first case there was 35.1% complete disagreement, but in the second only 11.1%. Possible reasons. As explained in The Conversation one of the authors of this study, Peter Vickers, possibly this greater agreement in the case of Mars has an explanation. And, although the planet’s biosignatures were calculated with indirect methods at interstellar distances, the rock from Mars could be analyzed directly by the Perseverance rover. in situ. Errors can also occur, but not as easily as with K2-18b. It is impossible to know. If there is something that all scientists agree on, it is that many of the characteristics that on Earth are usually considered biological They can also be the result of geological processes. Therefore, it is impossible to know for sure if there is extraterrestrial life only by analyzing these biosignatures. The data should always be read with caution. Only the discovery of a living organism would be conclusive in this regard. Let’s not get confused. Science is based on evidence, not opinions. When there is evidence of something, such as that vaccines save lives, there is no room for opinions. However, on more complex topics to study, such as those related to space, there may be opinions, which in turn are supported by evidence. That is precisely what C-SCOPE scientists have seen with this new study. We should not simplify. “Treating scientific opinion as pro or con runs the risk of oversimplification.” This is what we saw at the beginning of this text. The answer to whether there is extraterrestrial life cannot simply be a yes or no. There are many nuances that must be investigated and evidence that will surely evolve over time. Unfortunately, as Vickers also points out, “public debates often invoke scientific consensus.” Scientific consensus exists and is necessary, but individual opinions, as long as they are well founded, are just as useful. This is how science grows and is enriched. Based on data, questions and reviews. We should not trust a scientist who answers the question about life beyond Earth with a simple yes or no, because science is not that polarized. That, although it can sometimes frustrate us a little, is part of what makes it so fascinating. Image | Katrin Hauf (Unsplash) In Xataka | China is getting closer to surpassing NASA in its Martian mission. And just invited other countries to join

Predicting Alzheimer’s 10 years in advance is now a scientific reality. The challenge now is to prevent healthcare from collapsing

by

Alzheimer’s is a devastating disease that is undoubtedly a true ghost, since it only It becomes visible when the damage is already irreparable and that, despite trying to stop it, it is becoming difficult to control it. And historically, the medical diagnosis comes when memory begins to fail, but by then the brain has been suffering in silence for years, even decades. Now science focuses on the need for early diagnosis so that treatments can work. A new analysis. One of the ways to detect this disease before it begins to show the classic symptoms such as memory loss is through a blood test. This is the milestone that has been collected in The Lancet magazine recently thanks to research from the University of California, and that could generate a large population screening that is not free of controversy. What they did. The researchers followed 1,350 people aged between 56 and 69, without any type of dementia, for more than 35 years. And here the key was to look for specific proteins circulating in the blood that increased in the earliest phases of Alzheimer’s, as occurs with others marked in other diseases such as PSA in prostate cancer. And they found two biomarkers. The first of them is Aβ42/40, which is an early indicator that warns of the accumulation of hateful beta-amyloid plaques in the brain. But they also found the protein p-tau217, which is considered today the most precise marker for the pathology. The results. The 6% of participants who tested positive for these biomarkers showed a four-fold increased risk of developing verbal memory problems and a decline in their cognitive speed a decade later. But science has been trying to refine this tool for years, looking for markers such as GFAP, which rises about ten years before symptoms appear. See the invisible. The blood test does not walk alone in this diagnostic revolution, since on the same day, The Lancet published a second study based on nearly 800 participants from the US and Canada that tests a new and sophisticated neuroimaging technology: the MK6240 PET plotter. Until now, visualizing the tau protein, which is one of those responsible for Alzheimer’s by accumulating in neurons, was a great challenge. But this new tracer promises to be much more sensitive, detecting twice as many positive cases in healthy people with amyloid accumulation compared to the standard used today. You have to wait. Before throwing the bells in the air, it should be noted that experts point out that this test not ready to be used as general population screening. The reason lies in mathematics, since the prevalence of asymptomatic Alzheimer’s in healthy middle-aged people remains low in absolute terms, so applying this test to everyone would generate a very high volume of false positives. That is, an increase in this protein that is not actually related to early Alzheimer’s. But logically, the fear, anxiety and the resulting cascade of confirmatory tests would collapse the health services that are already stressed, and furthermore, the drugs we have, despite the fact that they stop the effects of the disease in its earliest phases, are not yet definitive. That is why we must remain on the right path, but there is still a long way to go to get this disease under control. Images | Robina Weermeijer Testalize.me In Xataka | Alzheimer’s no longer seems irreversible: science allows brains with advanced damage to recover for the first time in animals

There are thousands of scientific articles that ask you to pay to read them. Sci-Bot has arrived to access them for free

by

Scientific knowledge is supposedly something that nourishes all human beings to continue advancing, but the problem is that in many cases the articles that contain this knowledge are in tools that require a subscription to read them. This limitation in access to universal knowledge has led to the emergence of different platforms that bring together all these articles, such as Sci-Hubwhich now improves with his AI called Sci-Bot which promises to put an end to ChatGPT’s “hallucinations” in the scientific field. How it started. At the end of this same month of April, a message on networks published by Mushtaq Bilal began to go viral, and no wonder, since it gave a notice in which, ironically, it invited us to use a new Sci-Hub tool that allowed access to scientific advances for free. Something they do through the back door and that already it almost cost them closure forced by the famous ‘Pirate Bay’ But logically this publication had the opposite effect, going viral, and also revived the eternal debate about the paywalls in science they can block access to this knowledge. But now Sci-Hub’s new tool has arrived to change this (partly). A great library. To understand the magnitude of Sci-Bot, you must first look at the size of its brain, since since Elbakyan founded the web in 2011, Sci-Bot has become in a headache for scientific dissemination giants such as Elsevier or Springer, which are behind the publication of thousands of top-level articles. Here, according to the official data of the platform itselfSci-Hub hosts 88,343,822 research documents and books, so we are talking about 100 TB of human knowledge covering more than 95% of the publications of the main scientific publishers. And with free access and without going through the checkout, as happens on the websites of some of these publishers. The jewel in the crown. As Sci-Hub’s own page reveals, Sci-Bot is an AI that is designed to be able to search within the titanic database to select the most relevant studies and compose articulated responses. Its main attraction is that compared to generalist AIs like ChatGPT or Claude there are hardly any hallucinations, such as its creators pointed out in a scientific article in which tests were carried out in this sense. And this is something very important because I have been able to experience with my own eyes how AI invents bibliographical references or assigns research to authors who have nothing to do with it. But Sci-Bot, being anchored to a real database from which it draws the information, means that there are direct references to the original papers, allowing users to jump over the hated paywalls to access scientific evidence. Still needs improvement. At the moment it is starting in its alpha phase and that is why it has different limitations, such as that it can only answer one question at a time and does not maintain the thread of chained queries, even if they are on the same topic. But the truth is that it is quite promising to have access to the vast majority of human knowledge. They put obstacles in his way. Here, logically, the magazines have a lot to say, since they do not like having the articles freely available when they request a subscription to access them. This means that right now Sci-Bot has the most recent scientific articles as its blind spot, since due to the new and aggressive security measures implemented by large publishers in recent years to avoid scrapingthe database has some gaps in articles published in the most recent months. This makes the AI ​​unable to respond regarding the most recent evidence. But without a doubt we are facing an advance that began with the arrival of Sci-Hub with the promise of democratizing science, although through the back door by freely publishing articles that are actually ‘private’. And the only thing this will do is create a new front between open access and large publishers seeking financial returns. In Xataka | More and more media outlets are going over the paywall in Spain, the big question is whether there will be subscribers for everyone

In Spain we have glorified the long nap. In scientific studies they have a different opinion on the matter.

by

The siesta is, for many, a fundamental pillar of the Mediterranean lifestyle and an essential pleasure during the afternoon to be able to endure the rest of the day. However, scientific evidence has put this habit under the microscope, especially when naps last several hours and even give you time to dream several times. And the duration, frequency and especially age have a lot to say about the impact on health. The border of time. The current scientific consensus draws a fairly clear line between the classic power nap and the nap of putting on your pajamas and getting into bed for several hours. Because the barrier is marked precisely at the half hour mark, meaning that whoever passes it may begin to notice changes in their health. Here, a recent study from the University of Murcia analyzed to more than 3,000 adults in a Mediterranean environment to analyze the effect of naps. And the reality is that spending more than these 30 minutes was associated with having a higher BMI, a higher incidence of obesity and also being more likely to have a metabolic syndrome such as, for example, diabetes or hypertension. And there is more. When it comes to cardiovascular health, the reality is that the heart can suffer. Here the European Society of Cardiology presented In 2023, different data associated naps longer than 30 minutes with almost double the risk of developing atrial fibrillation. But also the American Heart Association took data who supported this point by pointing out that naps lasting longer than an hour increased the rate of cardiovascular disease by 1.82 times. The age factor. In this sense, one of the most important studies published is found in JAMA, that after following 1,338 older adults for 19 years and objectively measuring their sleep, they were able to see the effect it had. Here it was seen that sleeping more during the day, doing so more frequently or concentrating the nap in the morning was associated with with higher mortality from any cause. Specifically, each extra hour of daytime sleep increased the risk of mortality by 13%. There is much left to investigate. Among the studies that are currently available, no clear correlation has been found, that is, that someone who takes a three-hour nap a day should not have any problems. The only thing that is pointed out is that having the need to sleep excessively during the day can be a consequence of a poor night’s rest because there is a disease that is beginning to see the light, such as sleep apnea. You can take a nap. Although it may seem that we are demonizing the nap, the reality is that it has an important beneficial component when it comes to naps. less than 30 minutes. Here we are achieving an improvement in cognitive performance and it is also a way to recharge our energy a little for the rest of the day. But from here to actively planning a nap that can last for hours, there is a long way that should undoubtedly be avoided. Images | Unsplash In Xataka | Sleeping four hours a day and performing at your best is not a myth, it is a genetic rarity of 1% of the population

from the anti-aging miracle with scientific backing to the dangerous world of injectable ‘looksmaxxing’

by

We live in a time where people do not stop complement your nutrition with magnesium, collagenvitamins and more. But in recent months you have surely come across the famous ‘peptides’, a compound that has gained quite a bit of momentum in the world of cosmetics under the trend called looksmaxxing and also in bodybuilding. But… Do they have any scientific endorsement? What are peptides? In biological terms, peptides are short chains of amino acids that act as the building blocks of proteins, such as collagen, elastin and keratin. They are naturally in our body from the protein that we administer in our diet, and that the body uses as bricks to build the elements of the skin, muscle, immune system and many more functions. But this is something that has happened from natural biology to the field of cosmetics and nutricosmeticssince it has been seen that when these peptides are applied to the skin, they act as “messengers” that trick the body into believing that it has lost collagen, stimulating its production. In this way an anti-wrinkle effect is promised. What does science say? Unlike many “miracle supplements” that flood the internet, topical and oral peptides do have robust scientific backing, although, as always, keep in mind that you should not expect an amazing miracle when applying them. Among one of the most representative studies we have that of the Spanish Society of Aesthetic Medicine (SEME) which analyzed the effect of biomimetic peptides in patients between 40 and 70 years old. Here it was seen that, after four sessions, the biopsies confirmed real changes in the skin as there was a greater proliferation of collagen and elastin. There is more. Clinical trials with active ingredients such as Matrixyl in 93 people showed also a noticeable reduction in fine lines after 12 weeks of use, and also collagen peptide supplements such as Peptan have been shown in clinical trials to be able to reduce wrinkles around the eyes by 13% and pores by 57%. The dark side. When this becomes an obsession, that is when the problems begin, and again social networks have been a trigger. Here TikTok or Instagram has caused a trend known as looksmaxxing to break out., which in Spanish could be translated as ‘maximize appearance’. And it is nothing more than a subculture, predominant in younger men, who wants to optimize their physical attractiveness to the maximum. While the softmaxxing includes gym routines, haircuts and intense skincare, the most extreme aspect has popularized the use of injectable peptides. Suddenly, it’s not uncommon to see videos of content creators showing off refrigerators full of vials that promise ultra-luminous skin, instant muscle recovery, extreme fat loss, or hyper-defined jawlines. And it is a danger. The big problem with these injectables is that they are often not regulated, and people resort to the Internet to buy them thanks to the legal loopholes created by products under investigation or not suitable for human consumption. Here different organizations have launched alerts warning that using products that have not been authorized by the responsible agencies can cause serious risks such as infections, abscesses or even tissue necrosis. A gym shortcut. Beyond wanting to maximize beauty and reduce the number of wrinkles, in the world of bodybuilding, peptides have burst onto the scene, presenting themselves as a modern alternative to classic steroids. In this way, it is not uncommon to hear about BPC-157, TB-500 or CJC-1295, which are peptides that promise great aesthetic results. His promises. BPC-157 or TB-500 have been dubbed ‘healing peptides’ due to the great fame they have gained by promising regeneration of tendons, ligaments or muscle tears in record time. Another popular group are secretogogues such as CJC-1295 They stimulate the pituitary gland to produce growth hormone ‘naturally’, which enhances muscle growth and fat burning much more quickly than by directly injecting the hormone. Your problems. The problem in the field of bodybuilding is the same as in the aesthetic field, but multiplying the doses. Here science points out that although it is true that the BPC-157 can ‘heal’ tissues, at the moment it has not been approved by the EMA or the FDA for this use because there are a lack of studies to support its safety and the recommended dosage. Furthermore, playing with hormonal levels does not come for free, and without going any further, enhancing the release of growth hormone to have more muscle increases IGF-1 levels. And this in the long term can cause insulin resistance and, therefore, open the door to type 2 diabetes in several years. That is why the recommendation is always to avoid their consumption without medical supervision and logically if they have not been approved by the agencies responsible for drug control. Images | Norbert Buduczki In Xataka | Magnesium, creatine, collagen: we are taking supplements above what science believes is useful

There is a word that has multiplied exaggeratedly in scientific articles for a reason: ChatGPT likes it

by

That there are academic articles written by AI is something that has been proven beforethe question is how serious it is. To know the magnitude of this practice, a group of researchers has reviewed millions of paper abstracts published in PubMed and have found something interesting: there is a word that the AI ​​loves and the reason why it likes it so much is quite murky. Delve. Its translation is ‘go deeper’ and its use multiplied by 28 between 2022 and 2024, which coincidentally coincides with the boom of ChatGPT and language models. Other words such as ‘underscore’ or ‘showcasing’ are also cited, with a frequency increase of x13.8 and x10.7 respectively. None of them are a noun or a word related to the content, but rather have more to do with the style of writing and are very characteristic of the flowery language that LLMs usually use. flowery language. Does this mean that if we see one of these words in a paper it was written with AI? Not necessarily, but the increase is brutal. Researchers have compared the rise of ‘delve’ to other keywords, such as pandemic, which had a huge peak in 2020 and began to decline in 2021. The increase in the frequency of use of ‘delve’ is much more pronounced than all the others. It’s not coincidental. There is a stage in the process of creating a chatbot like ChatGPT that requires human intervention to fine-tune the responses; This is what is known as reinforcement learning from human feedback (for its acronym in English). RLHF). It turns out that most of the workers who are dedicated to this refining work are in African countries, such as Nigeria. guess where The use of these words in formal English is quite common. Exactly, in Nigeria. African style. ‘Delve’ is a fairly common word in business English in Africa, especially in Nigeria, and it is not the only one. There are also others like ‘leverage’, ‘explore’ or ‘tapestry’ that are more common in African English. According to 311institutealthough human feedback is very small compared to the enormous amounts of training data, it has a great impact since it is what defines the tone of the model when responding to us. Data labeling. It is a key step for training large language models and requires humans to be behind it. The problem is that the majority of workers who dedicate themselves to this are from impoverished countries such as Nigeria, Kenya or India, among others. In case the endless days and the ridiculous salaries were not enough, many times workers must review violent and very explicit imagesall without any type of psychological support. In Xataka | Being a porn moderator is not fun at all. He was exposed to “extreme, violent, graphic and sexually explicit content” Image | National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in Unsplash

The best science comedian does not have any scientific training. And that’s the key to your success.

by

Tom Gauld is one of the most accessible and yet peculiar cartoonists of today. His vignettes are a mixture of a wink for the initiated and simple, white humor.which often makes his cartoons a mix of “everyone can understand them” and “if you’re interested in science and literature, sure.” A real rarity in these times when you have to show up at franchise fan clubs with a very clear identification and resume. Because Gauld may talk about quantum physics, multiverses and the secrets of the cosmos, but he doesn’t leave anyone out either, all thanks to deceptively simple, but highly expressive graphics. Able to make an Escherian architectural nonsense believable or to perfectly portray the interior of an impossible dimension with just a couple of lines, Gauld reduces the complex to a couple of gentle strokes, and hence his popularity on the internet and in media of indisputable prestige such as ‘The Guardian’where he makes literary jokes, or ‘New Scientist‘, where it focuses more on science and technology. It is precisely a compilation of jokes of this last type, ‘Physics for cats’, which Salamandra is now publishing. Thanks to this brand new volume we have had the opportunity to speak with him and have him explain his creative processes and his career as a scientific comedian… who does not have much knowledge of science. We started, of course, by asking him how his collaboration with ‘New Scientist’ began and what impact it has had on the way he approaches scientific topics in his comics. It tells us that we have to go back very far in time. “My grandfather was a scientist, a marine biologist, and he always read the ‘New Scientist’. So when he went home, the magazine was always there, and when he finished reading the magazine, he would give it to my father, who was also interested in science. When I was little, I would look at the pictures and diagrams and, from time to time, I would read a little bit of the text.” And from there, a few years later and now a professional cartoonist, he began to collaborate with them. Gauld states that a magazine of this type is a splendid workplace for an illustrator: “Some concepts about reality or other universes cannot be photographed, so in These types of magazines have a good tradition of using illustrationsand in fact most of its covers are illustrations rather than photographs. Then, I don’t remember exactly why, I thought it was strange that they didn’t have a comic strip in the magazine.” He proposed it a decade ago and it was accepted, but, he says, “I got a little scared because I stopped studying science when I was about 16, so I’m not an expert at all.” How to draw science It is obvious that this approach to science from a non-scientist perspective will entail difficulties. But contrary to what it might seem, “the really difficult thing with vignettes is not getting the scientific details right.” His process is: “I read the magazine, I follow scientists on social media, I listen to podcasts and radio shows about science, and anything that I think could make a joke I write down in my notebook.” And his approach is clear: “I’m giving my own light-hearted, fun take on something that’s quite serious and thoughtful. I try to do it without being derogatory, like when you make fun of a friend you respect.” Which inevitably brings us to the next question: how do you balance scientific precision with the artistic freedom to create such abstract concepts? And in fact, here the lack of scientific training is revealed as an advantage: “When creating the strips, the fact that I have no scientific training, that I am an ordinary person, not a professional, perhaps helps me judge the level of knowledge at which the jokes should be.” And he adds: “I never want to make a cartoon that makes people feel stupid.which makes one think that a doctorate is needed to understand it”. What happens then when he stumbles upon concepts that even he can’t understand? “When some real science is mentioned in the cartoon, I like to get it right, so I do some research on the Internet or ask someone at New Scientist to check my formulas or whatever. Or I do it so badly that it’s obvious I’m not trying to get it right. In fact, last night an astrophysicist mentioned that one of the formulas in the background of one of my strips was correct and that he liked it, which I was very happy about.” When we ask him if there are any scientific ideas or theories related to physics that he finds especially inspiring, he tells us that two come to mind. “One that I think I keep coming back to in the cartoons is, and I guess this is more of a philosophical question than a physical one: What is reality? That and the idea of ​​many worlds. The other is quantum theory, which I still don’t understand. I’ve made some jokes about it and I’m proud of them, but I think they could be improved if I ever managed to understand all of quantum theory. Which may never happen, but I keep trying.” And here we enter into a personal question, but we couldn’t help but ask him: does Tom Gauld like Gary Larson’s humor? (Larson, for those who don’t know, is the creator of ‘The Far Side’, absolute master of comics with background geeka mix of surreal humor and deep knowledge of biology and science absolutely unmatched). “I’ve mentioned Gary Larson as an influence in almost every interview I’ve done today,” he confesses, “so I’m glad you brought it up.” Typical Gary Larson: “‘Hey! What is this, Higgins? Physics equations?… Do you like your job as a cartoonist, Higgins?” And he adds: “The cartoons from ‘The Far Side’ appeared in my local newspaper when I was a teenager and I have … Read more

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.