Thursday, July 31, 2025

Rewire Meaningless Addictions To Become A Life Long Learner

I have been saying this for over two decades because I did it. 

Dopamine is just a neurotransmitter; how we use it is up-to us. 

Rewire your curiosity. Neuroscience research shows that curiosity and impulsivity share remarkable overlaps in their neural substrates. The same brain circuits that make you compulsively check your phone can make you compulsively learn new things. When you experiment with new ideas or explore unfamiliar topics, you’re creating a positive version of a variable reward schedule: you don’t know what will work, what you’ll discover, or how it will feel, and that uncertainty feels rewarding.
- More Here

Tuesday, July 29, 2025

Scientists Are Tracking Worrying Declines in Insects—and the Birds That Feast on Them

In fact, 90 percent of the more than 10,700 known bird species rely on insects for food during at least part of their life cycle. Even the most dedicated seed-eating songbirds must eat insects and other arthropods, that many-legged group of creatures that includes spiders and millipedes, to produce eggs, to grow new feathers and to feed their young. Without insects, in other words, they wouldn’t survive. 

[---]

People may not be motivated to save the insects for their own sake, but a world without insects is a world without birds. It’s a world where no college student will hear the fluty song of a white-throated sparrow across a mountain lake and have her life changed. It’s a world where nature offers no song to the rising sun. It’s a silent spring. 

In the long term, it would become something even worse. “Without insects, everything dies: all mammals, all reptiles, all birds and even humans,” Ware says. “If you want to conserve any of those other things, including us, you should want to conserve insects.”

- More Here

Personally, I learned about this couple of years ago and the change I made was to turn off the patio lights. Living in the woods, I used to leave the lights on all night but I learned that killed so many insects. 

Obviously, I never use any pesticides nor do I classify some random plants as "weeds" and destroy them.  


Sunday, July 27, 2025

What We Still Get Wrong About Psychopaths

While the idea of psychopathy as a “brain disorder” has a long history and has been studied using various technologies, it wasn’t until the year 2000 that scientists began to rigorously test it using structural and functional MRI methods. Since then, dozens of MRI studies have been published, yet the most reasonable conclusion to draw from this research is that no reliable evidence has emerged to corroborate the idea that psychopathy—as measured by the Psychopathy Checklist (PCL)—is correlated with brain abnormalities of any kind.

Overall, the experimental results are predominantly nulls with a few statistically significant but inconsistent effects (often in opposing directions), which might be better explained as a byproduct of confounding variables unrelated to psychopathy, such as substance misuse, medication, or head trauma.

This conclusion raises an important question: If there has never been any clear evidence of brain abnormalities in psychopathic persons, why do so many scientists keep portraying psychopathy as a neurodevelopmental disorder?

[---]

Of course, it is inherently difficult to determine whether the systematic omission of null effects from the review literature is an act of scientific spin or simply an honest mistake of overlooking null effects, or a mixture of both. And perhaps it does not matter what the reason is because, whether the problem boils down to an issue with scientific spin or honest mistakes, the reality is the same: For the past two decades forensic practitioners and legal decision-makers would have been misled if they had followed due diligence and relied on the review literature when seeking information about neuroimaging research about psychopathy. The good news is that in the past years, we have seen the publication of high-quality review studies, where authors are now paying more attention to the extent of nulls.

However, even as the review literature is slowly correcting, readers should be aware that spin about the brain-disorder view of psychopathy is not a problem limited to the scientific peer-reviewed literature. It is arguably more rampant in public media, including op-eds and journalistic interviews, as well as in popular books about psychopathy, sometimes written by leading scientists. A search on YouTube and TikTok will readily yield hundreds of videos (amassing millions of views) where experts are explaining how psychopathy is caused by a brain abnormality, and it is not uncommon for TV documentaries about psychopathy to include a segment with MRI research.

[---]

Similarly, the book The Psychopath Inside by James Fallon (from 2013) conveys an admittedly absorbing story about how Fallon himself, a neuroscientist, accidentally discovered that he was a psychopath by studying his own MRIs. Lastly, in The Psychopath Whisperer by Kent Kiehl (from 2014), the narrative centers around neuroimaging research on psychopathic persons, of which the author, a leading expert, writes that the “consistency of their [psychopathic persons’] brain abnormalities never ceased to amaze me.”

The ideas conveyed in these popular books are, of course, scientifically untenable, and they arguably border on sheer make-believe. While they are undoubtedly entertaining, they come across as a form of spin that ends up doing a disservice to forensic practitioners and legal decision-makers as they perpetuate scientifically misleading views. 

- More Here

This is how science works - constantly correcting the past wrongs. 

This is from 2014, I was fascinated by James Fallon's work that I posted on this blog too. Plus, I shared this story with so many people.  I was wrong. Science is correcting it now. 

There is a new book Murderland: Crime and Bloodlust in the Time of Serial Killers by Caroline Fraser which is making a serious impact now. 

I have theory brewing inside me for a few years now and I will post it soon. 


Habitat Destruction & The Extinction Debt

My dear Sapiens; I will see, when I see you. 

And yeah, I am part of this moronic species who celebrates self-destruction. 

An important cause of extinction of any species is the destruction of the habitat that it needs to survive.

From Wiki

The term extinction debt was first used in 1994 in a paper by David Tilman, Robert May, Clarence Lehman and Martin Nowak, although Jared Diamond used the term "relaxation time" to describe a similar phenomenon in 1972.

In ecology, extinction debt is the future extinction of species due to events in the past. The phrases dead clade walking and survival without recovery express the same idea.

Extinction debt occurs because of time delays between impacts on a species, such as destruction of habitat, and the species' ultimate disappearance. For instance, long-lived trees may survive for many years even after reproduction of new trees has become impossible, and thus they may be committed to extinction. Technically, extinction debt generally refers to the number of species in an area likely to become extinct, rather than the prospects of any one species, but colloquially it refers to any occurrence of delayed extinction.

Extinction debt may be local or global, but most examples are local as these are easier to observe and model. It is most likely to be found in long-lived species and species with very specific habitat requirements (specialists). Extinction debt has important implications for conservation, as it implies that species may become extinct due to past habitat destruction, even if continued impacts cease, and that current reserves may not be sufficient to maintain the species that occupy them. Interventions such as habitat restoration may reverse extinction debt.

1994 paper by David Tilman, Robert May, Clarence Lehman and Martin Nowak:

Abstract

Habitat destruction is the major cause of species extinctions. Dominant species often are considered to be free of this threat because they are abundant in the undisturbed fragments that remain after destruction. Here we describe a model that explains multispecies coexistence in patchy habitats4 and which predicts that their abundance may be fleeting. Even moderate habitat destruction is predicted to cause time-delayed but deterministic extinction of the dominant competitor in remnant patches. Further species are predicted to become extinct, in order from the best to the poorest competitors, as habitat destruction increases. More-over, the more fragmented a habitat already is, the greater is the number of extinctions caused by added destruction. Because such extinctions occur generations after fragmentation, they represent a debt - a future ecological cost of current habitat destruction.

 

Saturday, July 26, 2025

Beauty Happens - What If Animals Find Beauty In The World, Just Like We Do?







 

Today, we are comfortable describing these animals as having self-awareness, complex emotions, language-like communication, and even culture, but we hesitate to say they have a sense of beauty.

Perhaps that is because our ideas about beauty have been shaped by the philosophical traditions of the Enlightenment. Back then, beauty was conceived as a rarefied property best appreciated by mostly disinterested intellectual observers. That nose-in-the-air, art-for-art’s-sake concept of beauty no longer holds much sway in a culture that recognises the potential for beauty in pretty much anything, from classical art to windblown plastic bags. But Enlightenment thinking left behind a habit of regarding aesthetic experiences as distinct from other pleasures. Animals could hardly be expected to share them.

[---]

Studies on whether other animals share these sensibilities mostly involve primates, rats, and a few test-amenable bird species. Chimpanzees seem to share our fondness for the colour red and for curved objects; newborn junglefowl soon develop a preference for symmetry. Even so, one can imagine that aesthetic sensibilities have far-reaching evolutionary roots, which go beyond tested species. Choosing mates is an obvious context: some researchers suggest that symmetry is generally a marker of good health. Another context is risk avoidance: jagged, angular objects are often dangerous. More broadly, complexity tends to reward a sense of curiosity. Richard Prum, an evolutionary biologist at Yale University, suggests that beauty demands ‘prolonged social and sensory engagement’. That engagement may have clear evolutionary benefits: an animal that lingers on a flowering tree’s loveliness might have a better chance of remembering its location when fruiting season comes.

We are even capable of finding beauty in ideas

To Prum, animals can only take aesthetic pleasure in those entities with which they have coevolved : wood thrushes and their layered, flute-like courtship songs, for example, or bumblebees and the pinks of wild roses. After countless generations of evaluation and choice, those stimuli are now entrained in their brains. Prum also thinks humans are unique in their ability to project tastes from one domain onto another, as when a predilection for colours that coevolved with fruit are projected onto the hues of a sunset.

- More Here and it was the them of 2017 Max's Holiday Card



Wednesday, July 23, 2025

The Rise Of Nazism & End Of Animosity Between Europe’s Catholics and Protestants

In the middle of the 20th century, a prolonged animosity came to an end. For more than four centuries, the enmity between Catholics and Protestants, known to theologians as the two confessions, had been one of the organising principles of European life. But, then, it stopped.

To grasp just how revolutionary this inter-Christian peace was, it’s worth remembering what came before it. Because the mutual hatred between the confessions shaped not only the early modern era, when gruesome acts of violence like St Bartholomew’s Day (1572) and the Thirty Years’ War (1618-48) tore Europe apart. Anti-Catholicism and anti-Protestantism remained powerful forces well into the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and shaped social and political life. The most extreme case was Germany, where the Protestant majority in 1871 unleashed an aggressive campaign of persecution against the Catholic minority. For seven years, state authorities expelled Catholic orders, took over Catholic educational institutions, and censored Catholic publications.

In the Netherlands, Protestant crowds violently attacked Catholic processions; in Austria, a popular movement called ‘Away from Rome’ began a (failed) campaign in 1897 to eradicate Catholicism through mass conversion. Catholics, for their part, were just as hostile to Protestants. In France, Catholic magazines and sermons blamed Protestants for treason, some even called for stripping them of citizenship. Business associations, labour unions and even marching bands were often divided across confessional lines.

Even on an everyday level, it still was common into the 20th century for neighbourhoods, parties and magazines to be strictly Catholic or Protestant. Prominent politicians and lay writers routinely blamed the other confession for backwardness, subversion and sexual perversity. A prominent German historian even claimed, in the 1860s, that Catholics and Protestants were descendants of different races.

But then, by the 1950s, this mutual disdain ended.

[---]

Why, then, did so many Europeans abandon these divisions within just a few decades? The answer lies in the 1930s, and especially the rise of Nazism.

The Nazis are generally remembered today for their extreme racism, imperialism and genocidal violence. But during their early years, their message often revolved around economic and gendered themes. And both echoed the concerns of many Christians. In the economic sphere, they promised a crusade against socialism and its more radical version, communism, and called on workers and employers to cooperate with each other in harmonious inequality. In the sphere of gender relations, the Nazis insisted on separation and inequality between the sexes, and used welfare policies to push women out of the workforce, so that they could focus on procreation. Early Nazi publications often explicitly claimed that these ideas overlapped with Christian teachings, and that they were Christianity’s allies.

But Nazi ideology also introduced an important innovation. While this is often forgotten, Nazism also promised to end the confessional divide. In its founding document from 1920, the party declared its support for ‘positive Christianity’, a new and racialised conception of religion that included both Catholics and Protestants. Adolf Hitler himself was quite preoccupied with the confessional division. In several passages of Mein Kampf (1925), as well as in several speeches, he blamed it for Germany’s internal divisions and weakness. The Nazis therefore claimed that a new order required a historic new, inter-Christian cooperation. Christian unity, the end of the centuries-long confessional war, was a necessary preparation for defeating ‘Judeo-Bolshevism’, a goal that Hitler and his acolytes considered inevitable.

As long as Nazism was a fringe movement, Christian elites largely ignored this message. But its rise to power, first in Germany and then, through military conquest, its occupation of Europe, led many to emulate the Nazi call for confessional unity. In 1932, for example, the Catholic writer Robert Grosche launched the first Catholic journal to openly support Nazism. Grosche posited that both the Church and the Nazi movement recognised that God’s grace operated not through individuals but through racial communities. Catholics and Nazis, Grosche maintained, were allies in creating a ‘sacred space’ in which all of society mobilised together towards collective salvation. Grosche also became the most vocal proponent of engagement with Protestants. The two confessions, he mused, were brethren in the ‘community of blood’. The Austrian bishop Alois Hudal published some of the most prominent efforts to square Catholic teachings with Nazi dogma. Like Grosche, he envisioned a joint future: ‘He who … eliminates the religious division,’ he explained, ‘would render the greatest service’ to ‘the German race and Europe’s entire cultural leadership.’

This meant that they could cooperate in restricting procreation to those ‘racially healthy’

Ideas of Nazi-inspired confessional unity were not restricted to theology. They informed popular commentary on bread-and-butter issues, such as economics. The Protestant German economist Georg Wünsch, for instance, had spent the 1920s attacking socialism and Catholicism as detrimental to economic growth, but in the 1930s he changed his tune. When Wünsch in 1936 proclaimed his support for Nazi economic policies, especially public works, he declared that these programmes embodied the values of both confessions. Wünsch thought that Nazi public works would foster harmony between employers and workers while maintaining divinely ordained inequalities (since private property remained protected). In the 1930s, Catholic and Protestant theorists began to criticise earlier stereotypes and insist that both confessions could contribute to the modern economy. One leader of the Inner Mission, Germany’s largest Protestant charity, proclaimed that the ‘violent struggle’ over economic policies was no longer between the confessions but ‘between the Christian confessions and the irreligious’ worldview of socialists and communists.

Across Europe, many Catholics and Protestants also admired the Nazis’ assault on feminism and sexual minorities. And, in turn, this led them to insist on the existence of an interconfessional sexual ethics.

[---]

The rise of Nazism in Europe, in short, dramatically reshaped Christian life. On the one hand, Christian elites across the continent were divided in their approach to the radical Right and its racism. On the other hand, that internal conflict led figures on both sides to seek new allies in the other confession. Both of these alliances, whether sympathetic or hostile to fascism, required enormous intellectual innovation. In both cases, these radical changes did not originate with bishops or popes; it was lay leaders and popular writers who led the way to a new Christian unity.

Since the new Christian peace was linked to Nazi ideology, one might expect it to die in the ruins of the Third Reich. But the exact opposite happened. The cooperation between Catholics and Protestants only deepened after the Second World War, becoming the mainstream of Christian life. Perhaps most importantly, talk of reconciliation moved from the sphere of ideas and small associations to the world of party politics and state power. Together, Christians were able to leave deep marks on European governance.

- More Here


Sunday, July 20, 2025

Why Exercise Is a Miracle Drug

Euan Ashley has claimed that exercise is the “single most potent medical invention” ever—more broadly effective than any medicine discovered in the natural world or devised in a laboratory. In 2025, this is the sort of rah-rah sentiment about working out that one might associate with a Make America Healthy Again ambassador rather than, say, the chair of medicine at Stanford University. So, what makes Ashley’s claim significant is that he is the chair of medicine at Stanford University.

Last year, Ashley and a large team of scientists conducted an elaborate experiment on the effects of exercise on the mammalian body. In one test, Ashley put rats on tiny treadmills, worked them out for weeks, and cut into them to investigate how their organs and vessels responded to the workout compared to a control group of more sedentary rodents.1 The results were spectacular. Exercise transformed just about every tissue and molecular system that Ashley and his co-authors studied—not just the muscles and heart, but also the liver, adrenal glands, fat, and immune system.

When I asked Ashley if it was possible to design a drug that mimicked the observed effects of exercise, he was emphatic that, no, this was not possible. The benefits of exercise seem too broad for any one therapy to mimic. To a best approximation, aerobic fitness and weight-training seem to increase our metabolism, improve mitochondrial function, fortify our immune system, reduce inflammation, improve tissue-specific adaptations, and protect against disease.

The latest entry in the Exercise Is Magic file comes from the New England Journal of Medicine. In a recent study, 900 cancer patients who had undergone surgery on their advanced colon cancer were randomly assigned to two groups. One group got a “structured exercise program.” They went to behavioral support sessions and attended supervised exercise classes every few weeks for several years. The other group received only basic information about diet and health.

Compared to the control group, the exercise group saw “significantly” more years without cancer, a 7 percentage point increase in the overall survival rate after 8 years, and a dramatic reduction in new primary cancers. Exercise, it seems, doesn’t just prevent disease; it can also save your life after you get sick.

The author Daniel Lieberman has put it well: 

Exercise is healthy and rewarding even though it’s something we never evolved to do. To adapt to the physical ease of the modern world, people invented a variety of weight-resistant devices and bodily movements that allow today’s population to simulate the arduous tasks that were once necessary to make it through a life, and this strange pantomime of physical stress seems to do more for us at a molecular level than any therapy or intervention in the history of medicine.

[---]

When I think about the case for global health spending, I think about the first days of my life. Nobody chooses how they come into the world. I achieved nothing to earn my birth in a hospital in Washington, D.C., as opposed to a clinic in Maputo or Kinshasa, or to deserve the automatic guarantee of American citizenship upon my first breath of air. That I was born in the capital of the world’s richest country is one of the greatest strokes of luck in my life—a pure accident of timing and gametes. There is no way to pay back this good fortune, and wallowing in guilt over it would do nothing, either. The quiet miracle of charity and global aid is that the uneven distribution of global wealth creates an asymmetry by which relatively trivial amounts of money from the rich can prevent immense suffering and death among the poor. Interventions as simple as bed nets, antiretroviral therapies for HIV/AIDS, and the distribution of commonplace vaccines and therapies in impoverished rural areas can save an astonishing number of lives, while costing a rich country an amount of money that makes practically no difference to any their citizen’s day-to-day.

Americans are blessed to be in possession of a kind of sorcerer’s stone—a bit of policy alchemy that can transform one-four hundredth of our spending into 100 million saved lives, in less than half a century. I think we should use it.

- More Here



Friday, July 18, 2025

Rajinikanth - One Of The Greatest Orators of Our Time

Over the last few years, I have been listening to his every talk (he gives 2 or 3 in a year); every one of these talks are filled with immense wisdom, humility, truth, humor and so much more. 

All this without any pride about his stardom and power and with full skin in the game. 

A simple human teaching other humans what he has learned from his life in a very very hard way. 

I have learned a ton from Rajni sir on how to be a good human being. Thank you, sir. 

  • Your Intelligence will tell you which thing to speak
  • Your ability will tell you how to speak 
  • Audience will tell you how much to speak 
  • Your experience will tell what to speak and what not to speak :-) 


Wednesday, July 16, 2025

The Politics of Contagion

Goddammit! 

Such beautiful words, sentences via a lived experience

Read the whole thing: eschew arrogance, victimhood, ideology and bring some gratitude into your life. 

In this moronic anthropomorphic world; most morons look for incentives. 

Remember, you will die sooner or later. Gratitude is probably the only tool which could reduce pain and suffering in months, weeks, and days before you die. 

There is you go, I gave you an incentive for having gratitude. 

It was summer. We all had mosquito bites and little scratches. That's how it is when you live in the woods. But now they didn’t heal. Instead, the bacteria was fizzing away in there, eating the edge of the wound outward, making it soft.

I started to feel kind of sick one day, and looked hard at one of my scabs. It looked sort of wet and puckered, like skin after a long bath. The next day all my little wounds looked like this. A few days later, it was worse. From a scrape on my shin I could see this angry red line of inflammation crawling up my leg—my blood had started to get infected—the evil was climbing toward my heart.

We had a well-stocked “medicine room” but only a few jars of old expired antibiotics. Those went to the worst cases. The rest of us tried healing it with herbs. I remember spending three hundred-fucking-degree days just hanging in a hammock, sweating and hallucinating from massive amounts of garlic and goldenseal and top-grade California hashish.

One guy actually had to have his lymph nodes removed—they liquefied in his armpits. He survived only because we took him to a hospital in the city, and they were legally required to treat indigents with no health insurance or money.

The worst part though, was the way it infected my mind. I felt like it was turning me evil. Oozing from many wounds, shambling around in the heat, surrounded by buzzing flies. I remember standing in the dinner line and wanting to eat my fellow comrades. Thinking about gnawing on their succulent flesh. Mouth watering at the image of a sizzling human drumstick. Suddenly thinking how very far away we were from society and its taboos.

[---]

Another year we couldn’t stop shitting ourselves, and didn’t know why.

We couldn’t find the culprit for weeks. We checked the drinking water filter and the hand soap, we cleaned the building, we made the primitivists move their roadkill tanning farther from the kitchen. But it wasn't enough. We kept getting sick. We learned later it was giardia.

Giardia is like a little tiny sucker fish in your stomach—not really a fish, it's a microorganism, but it latches its mouth onto your intestinal wall and sits there absorbing all the sugars and nutrients you would otherwise eat, and outputs the results of its metabolism. That means that it’s eating your food and shitting in your guts. They produce a lot of gas too, which has to come out somewhere, so all day long you’re burping out their farts.

No matter how much we washed our hands or cleaned our dishes, everyone kept getting sick. Sometimes we would recover for a minute and make a big decadent carrot cake to celebrate. Then we would all get sick again, shitting everywhere, spreading more of these critters back into our communal body. We learned later it’s the sugar that helps them multiply. Ass to hand to mouth to guts to ass, that’s the life cycle of giardia. And they were thriving.

[---]

Staph, giardia, and scabies in less than three years. Eventually I realized that these plagues were not coincidence. They were an inevitable outcome of the conditions. An organism is only as strong as its boundary layer. A society is much the same.

Our social organism was too open in some ways: the open door policy meant that all types of people could come in. All types of animals, diseases, and ideologies too. Our governance system was by consensus of those present, so as soon as you show up you get a vote. This made the governance completely impossible, as weekend warriors squared off against the people who would actually have to enact whatever decision was made.

We were too closed off as well. So far away in the mountains, with so little connection to the world, we lost immunities to things in the default world. When I returned I was disgusted by advertising, fluorescent lights, saran-wrapped foods, and all the other tissues of our modern technoleviathan. They were repellent to me, viscerally made me sick. I still think this is the correct reaction, but I’ve grown used to it now, and can stomach the grocery store with a smirk.

An organism must have a semi-permeable membrane. The ability to kick things out if they threaten its health, and the ability to intake resources to survive. Disgust is the immune system of the greater social organism. It protects us from contagion. But in a planetary society, we are constantly exposed to new vectors of change. Foreign organisms, environments, ideas; our cultures and societies are fully inflamed around these perceived intruders.

I see this online all the time. I watch as memetic phrases and viral emotions spread through my networks. We attack each other for following the wrong person on social media, for not wearing masks, for being inoculated with RNA, because we are all in constant fear of infection. No two groups can ally without first solving every small difference between them. Even homogenous ideological blocs tear themselves apart with loyalty tests and purity spirals. We are in a great autoimmune spasm of the human species.

If we are all one planetary social organism now, that creature is in pain. Its own organs attack each other, unable to recognize their interconnectedness. We’re constantly putting up boundaries. Boundaries between nations, between computers, between people.

But it doesn’t have to be this way.

I’ve learned a lot from experimenting with radical social structures, both in the woods and on the internet. At the commune, I thought we could prototype methods of living that were more egalitarian and ecologically balanced, and then export them past the barrier of our village to replicate. Those experiments were mostly failed utopias.

But I learned something important there, something I believe needs to spread and take hold: not all contagion is destructive. The flower feeds the bee and the bee pollinates the flower; neither can exist without the other. We are not separate species who must fear infection by the other. We are a system of flows.

 

 

Monday, July 14, 2025

Don't Eat Honey

There are lots of people who say of themselves “I’m vegan except for honey.” This is a bit like someone saying “I’m a law-abiding citizen, never violating the law, except sometimes I’ll bring a young boy to the woods and slay him.” These people abstain from all the animal products except honey, even though honey is by far the worst of the commonly eaten animal products.

Now, this claim sounds outrageous. Why do I think it’s worse to eat honey than beef, eggs, chicken, dairy, and even foie gras? Don’t I know about the months-long torture process needed to fatten up ducks sold for foie gras? Don’t I know about the fact that they grind up baby male chicks in the egg industry and keep the females in tiny cages too small to turn around in? Don’t I know, don’t I know, don’t I know?

Indeed I do. I am no fan of these animal products. I fastidiously avoid eating them. In fact, I think that factory farming is a horror of unprecedented proportions, a crime, a tragedy, an embarrassment, a work of Satan himself that induces both cruelty and wickedness in those involved and perpetrates suffering on a scale so vast it can scarcely be fathomed. I can be accused of many things, but being a fan of most animal products is not one of them.

But I assure you, honey is worse (at least in expectation).

[---]

Let’s first establish that bees in the honey industry do not live good lives. First of all, their lives are very short. They live just a few weeks. They die painfully. So even putting aside grievous industry abuse, their lives aren’t likely to be great. Predation, starvation, succumbing to disease, and wear and tear are all common.

Second of all, the honey industry treats bees unimaginably terribly (most of the points I make here are drawn from the Rethink Priorities essay I just linked). They’re mostly kept in artificial, conditions, in mechanical structures that are routinely inspected in ways that are very stressful for the bees, who feel like the hive is under attack. Often, the bees sting themselves to death. In order to prevent this, the industry uses a process called smoking—lighting a fire, sending smoke into the hives, to prevent alarm pheromones from being detected and the bees from being (beeing) sent into a frenzy. Sometimes, however, smoking melts the wings of the bees (though my sense is this is somewhat rare). Reassembly of the hive after inspections often crushes bees to death.

These structures, called Langstroth hives, also have poor thermal insulation, increasing the risk of bees freezing to death or overheating. About 30% of hives die off during the winter, meaning this probably kills about 8 billion bees in the U.S. alone every single year. The industry also keeps the bees crammed together, leading to infestations of harmful parasites.

Oftentimes, beekeepers take too much honey and leave all of the bees to starve to death. This is a frequent cause of the mass bee die-offs that, remember, cause about a third of bee colonies not to survive the winter. Because beekeepers take honey, the bees main source of food, bees are left chronically malnourished, leading to higher risk of death, weakness, and disease. Bees in the commercial honey industry generally lack the ability to forage, which exacerbates nutrition problems.

Bees also undergo unpleasant transport conditions. More than half of bee colonies are transported at some point. Tragically, “bees from migratory colonies have a shorter lifespan and higher levels of oxidative stress than workers at stationary apiaries.” The transport process is very stressful for bees, just as it is for other animals. It also weirdly leads to bees having underdeveloped food glands, perhaps due to vibration from transport. Transport often is poorly ventilated, leading to bees overheating or freezing to death. Also, transport brings bees from many different colonies together, leading to rapid spread of disease.

Honey bees are often afflicted by parasites, poisoned with pesticides, and killed in other ways. Queen bees are routinely killed years before they’d die naturally, have their wings clipped, and are stressfully and invasively artificially inseminated. This selective breeding leaves bees more efficient commercially but with lower welfare levels than they’d otherwise have. Often bees are killed intentionally in the winter because it’s cheaper than keeping them around—by diesel, petrol, cyanide, freezing, drowning, and suffocation.

So, um, not great!

In short, bees are kept in unpleasant, artificial conditions, where a third of the hives die off during the winter from poor insulation—often being baked alive or freezing to death. They’re overworked and left chronically malnourished, all while riddled with parasites and subject to invasive and stressful inspections. And given the profound extent to which the honey industry brings invasive disease to wild bees and crowds out other pollinators, the net environmental impact is relatively unclear. The standard notion that honey should be eaten to preserve bees is a vast oversimplification.

Thus, if you eat even moderate amounts of honey, you cause extremely large numbers of bees to experience extremely unpleasant fates for extremely long times. If bees matter even negligibly, this is very bad!

[---]

So don’t eat honey! If you eat honey, you are causing staggeringly large amounts of very intense suffering. Eating honey is many times worse than eating other animal products, which are themselves bad enough. If you want to make an easy change to your diet to prevent a lot of the suffering that you cause, please, for the love of God, avoid honey.

- More Here


Saturday, July 12, 2025

For Max


Out of the blue, some days when I least expect , an old song which I listened to many times over the years opens a new door with a room filled with memories of Max and I. 

I heard such a Hindi song last night and boy, it hit me hard. 

I am blessed to have lived and shared this planet with Max. Thank you my love. I miss you. 

Unfortunately, I didn't die with you. I will do everything I can to fulfill those promises I made you until my last breath. 




You changed my life for good 
by embracing me …
you put me on the sky,
picking me up from a cot…

You changed my life for good 
by embracing me …
you put me on the sky,
picking me up from a cot…

O friend, I considered your friend my god.
the word will remember…
this story of ours…
where can one find a friend like you
where there are such friendships…

This is the prayer of my heart
that you never go far from me.
when I have to live without you,
such a day should never come.

This is the prayer of my heart
that you never go far from me.
when I have to live without you,
such a day should never come.

I have to live with you here, 
and die with you only. 
the word will remember…
this story of ours…








Wednesday, July 9, 2025

Moss Medicines: The Next Revolution in Biotech?

Ever since we moved into Max's Walden, I started growing moss wherever I can (and we have a lot of natural moss) too. They look so beautiful and I read a lot about their benefits. 

Now finally Ralf Reski saw their potential as future medicine plus other non-animal based solutions!

Moss is an often-overlooked, ancient plant that is far from insignificant. Among the first to colonize land, mosses greened the planet and transformed Earth’s climate, providing an oxygen-rich atmosphere that allowed animals to evolve.1 These hardy pioneers can even filter and clean the polluted air of cities.2,3

Where others see a natural air purifier, Ralf Reski, a plant biotechnologist at the University of Freiburg, saw untapped potential in moss. In addition to the range of valuable compounds they produce naturally, Reski believed it made an ideal culture system to grow recombinant human proteins at scale.

Reski first worked on moss as an undergraduate, studying their genetics. He immediately fell in love with the tiny plants, so much so that he asked his supervisor if he could continue working on them for a PhD project. From those early days, his peers quickly dismissed the notion, pointing out that mosses didn't have to do anything with biotechnology. “You will never become a professor in Germany unless you work with real plants. Nobody is interested in mosses,” Reski recalled the caution from senior professors.

But he persisted. According to Reski, it is much easier to scale up the production of plant cell cultures in general. Mosses, specifically, require no complex media, lack any viruses that are associated with mammalian cell culture systems, and can be grown in large bioreactors in a cost-efficient manner. Over the past several decades, Reski has harnessed the power of moss to produce a variety of beneficial compounds for use in skincare, therapeutics, medical devices, and more.

“I always say that, additionally, [our moss culture systems] are vegan, kosher, halal, whatever you like, because we don't use any animal products,” he added.

 


Tuesday, July 8, 2025

Immune & Metabolic Effects of African Heritage Diets vs. Western Diets

Years ago, when I went to an Ethiopian restaurant for the first time , I was blown away. A lot of their dishes were exactly how my grandma and mom cooked. I mean almost 1:1 similarity. 

My dad had told me years ago, plus I have done my DNA and we were one of the first "tribes" to move out of Africa and settle in Tamilnadu. Hence, there is so much similarity in the cooking style which is very different than well.. Indian restaurants here or most of India. 

So over the years, I started cooking like my grandma did. 

And now this paper, I was waiting for the longest time: 

Abstract: 

African heritage diets are increasingly being replaced by Western-style dietary patterns because of urbanization, economic development, increased access to processed foods, globalization and changing social norms. 
The health consequences of this nutrition transition are not well understood. We conducted a randomized controlled trial in the Kilimanjaro region in Northern Tanzania to investigate the immune and metabolic effects of switching between Kilimanjaro heritage-style and Western-style diets for 2 weeks and consuming a traditional fermented banana beverage (‘Mbege’) for 1 week. 
Seventy-seven young and healthy volunteers assigned male at birth, some living in urban areas and some living in rural areas, were recruited in the trial. Primary outcomes were changes in the immune and metabolic profile before and after the intervention and at the 4-week follow-up. The switch from heritage-style to Western-style diet affected different metabolic pathways associated with noncommunicable diseases and promoted a pro-inflammatory state with impaired whole-blood cytokine responses to microbial stimulation. In contrast, the switch from Western-style to heritage-style diet or consuming the fermented beverage had a largely anti-inflammatory effect. 
Some of the observed changes in the immune and metabolic profiles persisted at the follow-up, suggesting a sustained impact from the short-term intervention. These findings show the metabolic and immune effects of dietary transitions and the consumption of fermented beverages, underscoring the importance of preserving indigenous dietary practices to mitigate noncommunicable disease risk factors in sub-Saharan Africa. 

This episode from Zoe Podcast covered this well, listen to it here: Can a traditional African diet help protect against inflammation? 

Prof. Quirijn de Mast: It's not easy to define because there is not a typical, traditional African diet. I mean, Africa is a huge continent, and there's so much diversity in dietary patterns across the different regions. That said, there are some unifying themes. If you talk about African diet, so many of the traditional African diets, they're mainly plant-based. That's one. 

So people consume a lot of legumes, traditional grains like millet, sorghum, and teff in Ethiopia. And these are very, I would say, interesting small grain cereals with many health benefits. 

[---]

Jonathan Wolf: And you've mentioned quite a few grains that I'm not familiar with. Sorghum, I wouldn't know if it dropped on my head. 

Could you describe for listeners who maybe are not familiar with a millet or a sorghum? What are they similar to, that we might be used to finding in a Western supermarket?

Prof. Quirijn de Mast: To be honest, I can't really compare it to what we are used to in Europe or in Western supermarkets. 

But they are extremely interesting, these grained cereals, because they're so nutritious. They contain lots of fiber, more than, for example, wheat. They are rich in polyphenols. They also have a low glycemic index, so you don't see this spike in glucose or insulin when you eat them. 

Yeah, they're kind of neglected, I would say, but they have very interesting health benefits. 



Monday, July 7, 2025

How the Western Diet Has Derailed Our Evolution

Indeed, when Sonnenburg fed mice plenty of fiber, microbes that specialized in breaking it down bloomed, and the ecosystem became more diverse overall. When he fed mice a fiber-poor, sugary, Western-like diet, diversity plummeted. (Fiber-starved mice were also meaner and more difficult to handle.) But the losses weren’t permanent. Even after weeks on this junk food-like diet, an animal’s microbial diversity would mostly recover if it began consuming fiber again.

This was good news for Americans—our microbial communities might re-diversify if we just ate more whole grains and veggies. But it didn’t support the Sonnenburgs’ suspicion that the Western diet had triggered microbial extinctions. Yet then they saw what happened when pregnant mice went on the no-fiber diet: temporary depletions became permanent losses.

When we pass through the birth canal, we are slathered in our mother’s microbes, a kind of starter culture for our own community. In this case, though, pups born to mice on American-type diets—no fiber, lots of sugar—failed to acquire the full endowment of their mothers’ microbes. Entire groups of bacteria were lost during transmission. When Sonnenburg put these second-generation mice on a fiber-rich diet, their microbes failed to recover. The mice couldn’t regrow what they’d never inherited. And when these second-generation animals went on a fiberless diet in turn, their offspring inherited even fewer microbes. The microbial die-outs compounded across generations.

Many who study the microbiome suspect that we are experiencing an extinction spasm within that parallels the extinction crisis gripping the planet. Numerous factors are implicated in these disappearances. Antibiotics, available after World War II, can work like napalm, indiscriminately flattening our internal ecosystems. Modern sanitary amenities, which began in the late 19th century, may limit sharing of disease- and health-promoting microbes alike. Today’s houses in today’s cities seal us away from many of the soil, plant, and animal microbes that rained down on us during our evolution, possibly limiting an important source of novelty.

But what the Sonnenburgs’ experiment suggests is that by failing to adequately nourish key microbes, the Western diet may also be starving them out of existence. They call this idea “starving the microbial self.” They suspect that these diet-driven extinctions may have fueled, at least in part, the recent rise of non-communicable diseases. The question they and many others are now asking is this: How did the microbiome of our ancestors look before it was altered by sanitation, antibiotics, and junk food? How did that primeval collection of human microbes work? And was it somehow healthier than the one we harbor today?

[---]

Most study subjects live in the tropics; their microbial communities may reflect tropical environments, not an ancestral human state. Yet even “extinct” microbiomes from higher latitudes—including from a frozen European mummy—are similarly configured to break down plant fiber, adding to the sense that the Western microbiome has diverged from what likely prevailed during human evolution.

The Sonnenburgs think fiber is so important that they’ve given it a new designation: microbiota-accessible carbohydrates, or MACs. They think that the mismatch between the Westernized, MAC-starved microbiome and the human genome may predispose to Western diseases.

Scientists studying these communities suspect that while mortality is high from infectious diseases, chronic, non-communicable diseases are far less prevalent. At the same time, researchers since the late 20th century have repeatedly observed that even in the West, people who grow up on farms with livestock, or exposed to certain fecal-oral infections, like Hepatitis A and sundry parasites—environments that, in their relative microbial enrichment, resemble these subsistence communities—have a lower risk of certain Western afflictions, particularly hay fever, asthma, and certain autoimmune disorders.

[---]

As Justin Sonnenburg put it, “We have this unsupervised drug factory in our gut.” The question facing microbiologists today is how to properly tend to that factory.

Here, studies of populations living more traditional lifestyles may provide clues. In the past, most people likely imbibed many times more fiber than today. If you eat minimally processed plants, which humans have for millions of years, you can’t avoid fiber. Modern hunter-gatherers and horticulturalists certainly eat loads of it. The Hadza of Tanzania, for instance, consume at least 10 times more than Americans, in tubers, baobab fruit, and wild berries. Agriculturalists, like those Burkina Fasans, also eat more fiber than Western populations, in porridges and breads made from unrefined grains.

Given this constant supply of microbiota-accessible carbohydrates, human microbiomes of the past, the Sonnenburgs argue, likely produced a river of these short-chain fatty acids. That probably changed some with the transition to agriculture, which made diets less diverse. But an even more drastic shift occurred quite recently, with the advent and widespread adoption of refined foods. As a result, westernized populations, the Sonnenburgs think, have lost healthful, fiber-fermenting microbes. And we suffer from a kind of fermentation byproduct deficiency.

So why can’t we supplement our diet with short-chain fatty acids? When I visited Sonnenburg, he showed me one reason why: The ecosystem that produces the acids may be as important as the acids themselves. He brought up two cross-sectional images of fecal pellets still in mice intestines. Most microbiome analyses take a tally, from genetic markers, of what microbes are present and in what abundance. That’s equivalent to imagining what a forest looks like from a pile of wood chips, and gives little sense of how the forest was organized. By some ingenious tinkering, though, one of Sonnenburg’s post-docs had developed a way to freeze the ecosystem in place, and then photograph it.

The resulting picture was unlike any rendition of the microbiome I’d seen before. One animal had eaten plenty of fiber, the other hadn’t. In the fiber-fed ecosystem, similar bacteria clustered with one another, not unlike schools of fish on a reef ecosystem. An undulating structure prevailed across space. But in the non-fiber diet, not only was diversity reduced, the microbes were evenly distributed throughout, like a stew boiled for too long.

At this point, Sonnenburg sat back in his chair and went quiet, waiting for me to notice something. To one side of both images, microbes were mostly absent—the mucus layer on the lining of the gut. But that layer was twice as thick in the fiber-fed mice than the non-fiber fed. That difference amounted to about 30 nanometers, far less than the width of a human hair. But one day we may look back and shake our heads that Western diseases—from diabetes to colon cancer—stemmed from 30 nanometers of mucus that, somewhere along the way, went missing in the developed world.

We think of the Western diet—high in unhealthy fats, sugar, and proteins—as overly rich. But what’s missing from the diet may be just as, and perhaps more, important than what’s abundant.

Years ago, while still a post-doc, Sonnenburg discovered that something very odd occurs when those MAC-loving microbes go hungry. They start eating mucus. “This is the stage where you say, ‘Oh my God. They’re eating me.’ ” Sonnenburg said. “You can see it.”

- More Here


Wednesday, July 2, 2025

Death Of Conscience

Don’t judge people by what they say, boy. That’s the mistake most folks make. 
Watch what they ignore. What doesn’t makes them pause. 
That’s where their conscience lives or dies.

  • If Something Doesn’t Hurt Them, They Don’t Care Who Bleeds
  • They Explain Away Cruelty, Even When It Sounds Absurd
  • They’re Always “Practical” in Matters That Demand Morality
  • They Hide Behind Rules to Justify the Unjust
  • They Laugh at the Wrong Things and Never Flinch at the Right Ones
  • They Feel No Awe in the Face of Goodness
  • They Remember Everything Except the Harm They’ve Done

- More Here




Tuesday, July 1, 2025

What if Every Roadkill Had a Memorial?

This is so surprising. I love to be surprised. There are still some immensely caring people on this planet. 

Thank you for caring. 

I drive like a senior citizen exactly for this reason. Tragic loss of life just because I want to speed or worse, lack awareness. Even when driving Max for chemo and on a handful of days in extreme emergency, I never drove fast. 

Read the whole piece here: What if Every Roadkill Had a Memorial?

We saw it happening, my then-girlfriend and I: The little bird suddenly flew out of the bushes by the roadside, darted low across the tarmac, and then disappeared into the right rear wheel of the car in front of us. It was centrifuged for a few revolutions before it was ejected sideways and landed, flapping in an uncoordinated fashion, in the verge.

I quickly parked the car, walked back, squatted down, and picked up the animal: a Sardinian warbler, a pretty, very common bird; petite and not at all resistant to the racking it had just suffered. My girlfriend squatted beside me. Together we watched how the bird attempted a few half-hearted wing flaps, weakly pecked my fingertip, and then lost the light in its little beady eyes and died in the palm of my hand.

At that moment, to my surprise as much as to my girlfriend’s, I was overcome by sadness, and for a few minutes I sat there, crying, by the side of a country road in the Peloponnese, cradling a dead warbler in my hand, with claxoning cars swishing by and my girlfriend comforting me with a slightly bewildered look on her face. Fifteen minutes later, when we were driving again, she quietly asked me how come the death of a bird affected me so, when I am such an animal mass murderer myself.

Fifteen minutes later, she quietly asked me how come the death of a bird affected me so, when I am such an animal mass murderer myself.

She hit the nail — or rather, the insect pin — on the head. Throughout my life as a scientist I have been responsible for the scientifically sanctioned deaths of hundreds of thousands of animals, mostly arthropods and mollusks. In fact, earlier that day I had merrily stuffed some snails into a jar of alcohol. And although I have never killed any vertebrates, I have regularly participated in field trips where others were collecting frogs, small mammals, and also cute little birdies like that Sardinian warbler, and never shed a tear.

So why would I cry over the death of this bird? Analyzing my emotions, I concluded that what had touched me was the utter senselessness of this death. An animal that is killed and preserved by a researcher contributes to the knowledge that we have of its species. It is lovingly curated, its features are recorded, it is the object of study and the subject of scientific publications, and it is preserved for eternity in a natural history museum collection. Yes, its life has been lost, but its body has obtained a new kind of value.

Roadkill is the complete opposite of that. That motorist did not kill that warbler intentionally; in fact, he or she probably never even noticed the collision. And that ignorance and lack of intent are what make the event so tragic. A little life has been ripped from this Earth (and, who knows, if it was a nesting bird with dependent chicks, several lives) and its value has been lost forever.

[---]

And clutter the road with shrines is exactly what my colleague Bram Koese did. Koese is one of the best freshwater zoologists of the Netherlands, specializing in mayflies and caddisflies but with a near encyclopedic knowledge of most other aquatic animals, and terrestrial ones, for that matter. He lives in a town, surrounded by wetlands and canals, some 30 kilometers south of Amsterdam, and takes regular bicycle rides along the Ziendeweg, a narrow road between his hometown and the next. During rush hour many commuters use it to circumvent the traffic jams on the highway. And these speeding cars often hit wildlife, Koese noticed. He saw entire families of graylag geese (Anser anser) and barn swallows (Hirundo rustica) being mowed down. Prompted by these sad encounters, and curious about the actual impact of the traffic on wildlife, he began logging his roadkill sightings on the citizen science platform Observation International. For a whole year, on average every other day, he would ride up and down the road, scanning with a headlamp if it was dark, and record and photograph every dead animal (birds, mammals, amphibians, even the occasional butterfly or migrating crayfish) and its location.

His sightings amounted to 642 carcasses. The “death list” included 35 mammals, 90 birds, and 515 amphibians, among which were rare and protected species such as the stoat (Mustela erminea), weasel (Mustela nivalis), European polecat (Mustela putorius), tawny owl (Strix aluco), moor frog (Rana arvalis), and natterjack toad (Epidalea calamita). Shocked by the volume of his data, and disenchanted by the lack of response he got from the municipality, Koese then hatched a secret plan for a clever guerrilla campaign.

[---]

By that time the project had served its purpose. Koese, his team, and their cause were in the news for the whole weekend, the local authorities had been presented both with a letter and a scientific report with a detailed analysis of the findings, and a strong case had been made for the road to be out of bounds for anything but local traffic.

Koese’s project drives home two things. First, that road ecology, as it is called, is a perfect subject for community science projects. Good online platforms exist for logging roadkill events, and the community group could adopt guerrilla tactics for their campaign that an “official” project would probably not have got away with. (Moreover, these community projects tend to be focused on the impact of traffic on wildlife, whereas many officially approved roadkill monitoring projects are begun for the opposite reason: to control the impact of wildlife on traffic.)

The second point is that one roadkill is a tragedy, but a million roadkills are not just a statistic. By upscaling from a single roadside shrine in memory of a single deceased animal to a mass grave that showed the actual scale of the problem, Koese and his team were able to make us seamlessly progress from mourning the loss of one individual animal’s life to grasping the danger that entire populations are exposed to.