(Roughly) Daily

Posts Tagged ‘public health

“In the natural world, anything that is colored so brightly must be some kind of serious evolutionary badass”*…

A close-up image of a person's finger gently holding a ladybug on a green leaf. The background is blurred foliage, highlighting the ladybug's bright red and black markings.

There are an estimated 10 quintillion (10,000,000,000,000,000,000) individual insects alive on earth today; they’ve been around for over 350 million years and ihabit nearly every environment, from deserts to snowy mountains. Their total biomass is massive, estimated to be around 70 times more than all humans combined. Often considered pests, only about 3% of species are harmful to humans; the vast majority are crucial for pollination, decomposition, and as food sources for other animals. (More insect data.)

Loren” (and here) is a microbiologist fascinated by bugs– and ready to share…

I am incredibly fond of insects. They’re small and usually pretty fast, so it’s rewarding to successfully capture a photo of one. from 2017 to 2023, I was fairly consistent about chasing down bugs and sharing the photos on instagram, but sticking them all in a square grid can only do so much for me (or you). Here, I want to have a little more fun with my photos, and share other bug-related things that I like. There’s a lot! I am not an entomologist, merely a bug fan, so this page in its current state skews more towards the entertaining than the informative, but who knows what it may turn into. Right now there’s an entomology textbook sitting on my coffee table, and plenty of time to read it while the bugs overwinter…

Browse and learn: “The Bug Zone,” via Matt Muir (@mattmuir.bsky.social) and his always-illuminating Web Curios (@curiobot.bsky.social).

* Neal Stephenson, Cryptonomicon

###

As we creep and crawl, we might spare a thought for a man concerned with “bugs” of a different sort, Joseph Lister (1st Baron Lister, OM, PC, FRS, FRCSE, FRCPGlas, FRCS); he died on this date in 1912. A surgeon, medical scientist, and experimental pathologist, he was a pioneer of antiseptic surgery and preventive healthcare. Just as John Hunter revolutionised the science of surgery, Lister’s revolutionized the craft of surgery.

Lister researched the role of inflammation and tissue perfusion in the healing of wounds, and advanced diagnostic science by analysing specimens using microscopes. But his biggest contributions were a function of his application of Louis Pasteur‘s then-novel germ theory. Lister introduced carbolic acid (modern-day phenol) as a steriliser for surgical instruments, patients’ skins, sutures, surgeons’ hands, and wards, promoting the principle of antiseptics. And he devised strategies to increase the chances of survival after surgery by reducing post-operative infections (e.g., segragating post-op patients from pre-op patients who had germ-riddled wounds).

See also.

A black and white portrait of a man with wavy hair and distinctive sideburns, dressed in formal attire featuring a bow tie and a vested coat.

source

Written by (Roughly) Daily

February 10, 2026 at 1:00 am

“Where’s the beef?”*…

A close-up of black and white cows in a barn.

There’s been some consternation over the FDA’s new food pyramid, with nutritionists arguing that, while the emphasis on “whole foods” (as opposed to processed) is a plus, the guidance overstresses satured-fat-rich foods and under-recommends gut-healthy fermented foods, and beans and grains (see also here).

There could be material economic costs as well. The Federal goverment already spends over $72 Billion subsidizing livestock— not counting the reduced cost grazing permits offered ranchers on Federal land. And as ranch and farm land ownership has become more and more concentrated in fewer and fwer hands, the benifits are flowing to fewer, wealthier “ranchers” (like Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Jeff Bezos, a clutch of large corporations, and foreign investors).

Then there are the environmental implications. Oliver Milman ponders the potential scale of that impact if the new pyramid is followed…

The Trump administration’s new dietary guidelines urging Americans to eat far more meat and dairy products will, if followed, come at a major cost to the planet via huge swathes of habitat razed for farmland and millions of tons of extra planet-heating emissions.

A new inverted food pyramid recently released by Donald Trump’s health department emphasizes pictures of steak, poultry, ground beef and whole milk, alongside fruits and vegetables, as the most important foods to eat.

The new guidelines are designed to nearly double the amount of protein currently consumed by Americans. “Protein and healthy fats are essential and were wrongly discouraged in prior dietary guidelines,” said Robert F Kennedy Jr, the US health secretary. “We are ending the war on saturated fats.”

But a surge in meat-eating by Americans would involve flattening vast tracts of ecosystems such as forests to make way for the hefty environmental hoofprint of raised livestock, emitting large quantities of greenhouse gases in the process, experts have warned.

Even a 25% increase in the amount of protein consumed in this way in the US would require about 100m acres of additional agricultural land each year, an area about the size of California, and add hundreds of millions of tons of extra pollution to an already overheating planet, according to an estimate by the World Resources Institute (WRI), a non-profit research body.

“We are seeing millions of acres of forest cut down and agricultural expansion is the lead driver of that – adding 100m acres to that to feed the US means additional pressure on the world’s remaining ecosystems,” said Richard Waite, the director of agriculture initiatives at WRI.

“It’s already hard to feed the global population while reducing emissions and stopping deforestation, and a shift in this direction would make the challenge even harder. We need to reduce the impact of our food systems urgently and the US is an important piece of the puzzle in doing that.”

While many Americans will simply ignore the guidelines, the new framework will probably influence institutions such as schools and federal workplaces. The average American already eats about 144kg (317lb) of meat and seafood a year, second globally only to Portugal, and ingests more protein than previous federal government guidelines recommended.

Any further increase will be felt in places such as the Amazon rainforest, which is already being felled at a rapid rate for cattle ranches and to grow livestock feed.

Red meat, in particular, has an outsized impact upon the planet – beef requires 20 times more land and emits 20 times more greenhouse gas emissions per gram of protein than common plant proteins, such as beans. The raising of cows, pigs, lamb and other animals for slaughter is also associated with significant localized air and water pollution.

“To the extent that people follow these guidelines and eat more animal protein foods, particularly beef and dairy, they will negatively impact our environment, since the production of these foods emits way more greenhouse gases than vegetable protein foods, or even other animal foods,” said Diego Rose, a director of nutrition at Tulane University.

Choosing beef over beans and lentils is “a big choice we make that has real consequences”, said Waite. “If people want more protein there are ways to do that via eating plant-based foods without the environmental impacts. We can have our protein and our forests, too.”

Animal agriculture is responsible for about a fifth of global emissions, with little progress made in recent years to reduce its impact as more of the world starts to demand meat products. Worldwide consumption of pork, beef, poultry and meat is projected to reach over 500m tonnes by 2050 –double what it was in 2000.

In the US, much of this meat-eating is concentrated in a relatively small group of avid carnivores – just 12% of Americans consume nearly half of the country’s beef, a 2024 study found. But plant-based options, including “fake meat” burgers, have suffered a slump in sales in recent years amid a resurgent trend in meat-eating, fueled by online “meatfluencers” and a broader desire to consume more protein.

The environmental problems associated with the meat industry were previously highlighted by Kennedy himself, when he was a campaigner on green issues. At one point, Kennedy even said the pork industry was an even bigger threat to the US than Osama bin Laden, the terrorist mastermind.

“The factory meat industry has polluted thousands of miles of America’s rivers, killed billions of fish, pushed tens of thousands of family farmers off their land, sickened and killed thousands of US citizens, and treated millions of farm animals with unspeakable and unnecessary cruelty,” Kennedy wrote in 2004.

However, since becoming Trump’s health secretary, Kennedy has sought to elevate meat-eating, dismissing an independent scientific committee’s advice to emphasize plant-based proteins to instead favor meat.

“The Trump administration will no longer weaponize federal food policy to destroy the livelihoods of hard-working American ranchers and protein producers under the radical dogma of the Green New Scam,” a spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services said in response to questions about the knock-on environmental impacts of the new guidelines.

“Americans already eat a lot of meat, so this promotion of more meat and things like beef tallow is puzzling to me,” said Benjamin Goldstein, a researcher at the University of Michigan who has studied the huge emissions associated with meat-eating by city-dwellers in the US.

“We needed to be addressing climate change two decades ago and we are still not doing enough now. If we are adding more greenhouse gases to impose unnecessary ideas of protein intake, that’s going to destabilize the climate further. It’s going to have a big impact.”…

Even 25% increase in meat and dairy consumption would require 100m more acres of agricultural land: “Huge amounts of extra land needed for RFK Jr’s meat-heavy diet guidelines,” from @olliemilman.bsky.social in @theguardian.com.

Wendy’s advertising tagline (from 1984)

###

As we deconstruct diet, we might send bibulous birthday greetings to William Claude Dukenfield; he was born on this date in 1880. Better known by his stage name, W.C. Fields, an actor, comedian, juggler, and writer, became a vaudeville headliner, “the world’s greatest juggler” [which he may have been], then transitioned to Broadway (e.g., the Ziegfeld Follies revue and Poppy, wherein he perfected his persona as a colorful small-time con man) and began appearing in silent films. In the 1930s, Fields wrote and starred in a series of successful short films for (his golf buddy) Mack Sennett, then appeared in 13 feature films for Paramount. An illness sidelined him in the late 30s, but he roared back in the early 40s with Universal classics like  My Little Chickadee, The Bank Dick, and Never Give a Sucker an Even Break.

Now widely regarded one of the comic geniuses of the 20th century, the Surrealists loved Fields’ absurdism and anarchistic pranks. Max Ernst painted a Project for a Monument to W. C. Fields (1957), and René Magritte made an Homage to Mack Sennett (1934).

The Firesign Theatre titled the second track of their 1968 album Waiting for the Electrician or Someone Like Him “W. C. Fields Forever,” a riff on the Beatles song “Strawberry Fields Forever.”

“I personally stay away from natural foods. At my age I need all the preservatives I can get.”

– W. C. Fields

Written by (Roughly) Daily

January 29, 2026 at 1:00 am

“Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health is the most shocking and inhumane”*…

A diverse group of people standing in a queue, waiting for assistance, with expressions showing concern and anticipation.
People wait for an exam at the Care Harbor/LA free clinic that provides free dental work, medical exams, screenings and immunizations, in Los Angeles, California, on September 27, 2012

We tend to encounter data about public health in the form of averages over the population as a whole. But as a recent study published in The Lancet painfully demonstrates, the underlying reality is much more complicated– and alarming…

The differences in U.S. life expectancy are so large it’s as if the population lives in separate Americas instead of one. 

Nearly two decades ago, a team of researchers published the landmark “Eight Americas” study, which examined drivers of U.S. health inequities between 1982 and 2001 by dividing the U.S. population into groups based on geography, race, income, and other factors. 

A new research study, published this month by the University of Washington and the Council on Foreign Relations, revisits that landmark research project, adding two new “Americas” to account for Latino populations. 

This new study finds that U.S. life expectancy disparities have grown over the last two decades between 2001 and 2021, with the differences between the best and worst of those “Americas” increasing from 12.6 years in 2000 to 20.4 years in 2021. COVID-19 exacerbated this divide, but gaps in longevity had already been growing before the pandemic hit…

Line graph displaying life expectancy trends in the United States from 2000 to 2020, highlighting disparities among different racial and geographic groups. The graph shows fluctuations in life expectancy and indicates the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on these trends.

The 10 Americas: How Geography, Race, and Income Shape U.S. Life Expectancy,” from @thinkglobalhealth.org. Both this summary article and the underlying paper are eminently worth reading in full.

* Martin Luther King, Jr.

###

As we unpack unfairness, we might send preventative birthday greetings to Ernst Wynder; he was born on this date in 1922. An epidemiologist and public health researcher, he is best remembered for his pioneering work in identifying the link (in 1950) between smoking and lung cancer.

Wynder devoted his career to the study and prevention of cancer and chronic disease, publishing hundreds of scientific papers. Through the 1950s and 1960s, he worked at Sloan-Kettering Institute for Cancer Research. In 1969, he founded the American Health Foundation. In 1972, he founded the academic journal Preventive Medicine and served as the founding editor.

A black and white portrait of Ernst Wynder, a prominent epidemiologist and public health researcher known for his work linking smoking to lung cancer.

source

“A world that is safe for mothers is safe for all”*…

A new mother joyfully holds her newborn baby in a hospital setting, both smiling and looking content.

There’s much discussion today of falling fertility rates and the prospect of a shrinking population. In her terrific newsletter, Your Local Epidemiologist, Katelyn Jetelina explores the (real) reasons why, and what can be done…

In the U.S.—and across much of the world—fertility rates are falling, and populations are projected to shrink.

A line graph illustrating the total fertility rate (births per woman) over time, showing a decline in the United States (in red) and globally (in blue) from 1933 to 2023.

The reasons people are worried vary. Some fear a loss of global influence or long-term human survival. Others approach the issue through religious, political, or ideological lenses—or just out of curiosity. Whatever the motivation, the question keeps coming up: What can we do?

In response, the new administration—guided in part by Project 2025—is considering financial incentives to encourage people to have more children. Ideas include education, like on menstrual cycles, or a “National Medal of Motherhood” to mothers with six or more children, as well as financial incentives like a $5,000 cash baby bonus or Fulbright scholarships reserved for mothers.

Globally, paying families to have children has yielded mixed results. In Russia, for example, payments ($10,000) have increased fertility rates by about 20%. However, in Canada during the 1970s, similar efforts yielded only a short-term increase.

So no—we don’t need to blindly throw spaghetti at the wall. We have the evidence: if we want people to have more children, we need to create a society that actually supports parents…

[Jetelina unpacks the dynamics at play: access to affordable health care, the lack of support for new parents, the cost of raising a child, the climate of fear of maternal mortality, and the dismantling of programs that support women…]

… People aren’t having fewer children because they don’t care about family, faith, or their future, or the future of this country. They’re having fewer because the system makes it too hard, too risky, and too expensive. A $5,000 payment is a drop in the bucket compared to what is required of families in this day and age.

If the government wants to be part of the solution, it shouldn’t just throw out incentives. It should invest in the foundation: affordable care, parental leave, safe childbirth, and supportive systems.

Let’s focus on what matters: building a society where families can thrive. If we do that, everything else—including birth rates—may just follow…

It’s not rocket science: “Birth rates are falling. But solutions are focused on the wrong thing,” from @kkjetelina.bsky.social.

(Image at top: source)

Abhijit Naskar (@naskarism.bsky.social)

###

As noodle on nativity, we might spare a thought for Edouard Van Beneden; he died on this date in 1910. An embryologist, cytologist and marine biologist, he made discoveries concerning fertilization in sex cells and chromosome numbers in body cells. His studies (of the roundworm Ascaris) showed that sexual fertilization results from the union of two different cell half-nuclei. Thus a new single cell is created with its number of chromosomes derived as one-half from the male sperm and the other half from the female egg. Van Beneden also determined that the chromosome number is constant for every body cell of a species. His theory of embryo formation in mammals became a standard scientific principle.

Statue of Edouard Van Beneden, an embryologist and marine biologist, displayed outside a building, with an inscription detailing his name and lifespan.
Edouard van Beneden in front of the Aquarium et musee de zoologie in Liège, Belgium (source)

“Every picture tells a story”*…

The world’s populations is unevenly spread across the globe. But, plotted by latitude (as per this visualization from Engaging Data), it’s a little more concentrated…

… which is interesting (perhaps better said, “bracing”) to consider aside this illustration from NOAA…

Global warming is coming for most of us: “World Population Distribution by Latitude and Longitude,” from @engagingdata.bsky.social and @climate.noaa.gov.

See also: “The world is heating up. How much can our bodies handle?” from @gristnews.bsky.social and “Understanding Climate Migration,” from RAND.

* traditional saying

###

As we feel the heat, we might spare a thought for John Graunt; he died on this date in 1674. A haberdasher turned statistician, he is considered by many to be the father of demography (the statistical study of human populations).

A charter member of The Royal Society, Graunt distributed a 90-page book, Natural and Political Observations Mentioned in a Following Index, and Made upon the Bills of Mortality at the February, 1662 Society meeting. He described his work as having “reduced several great confused volumes” of parish records into a few easily to understood tables, and “abridged such Observations… into a few succinct Paragraphs.” He initiated “life tables” of life expectancy. His use of demographics was further pioneered by his friend Sir William Petty and Edmond Halley, the Astronomer Royal.

Graunt’s work also gives him some claim to having been the first epidemiologist.

source