Taking Stock: Flattening work flattening "the curve"
America rejects American science | Africa heats up | Milk is cool again in USA | The age of CRISPR | India fights AMR | Helping young Africans thrive
A graphic depicting global CO2 levels over time, often called the ‘Keeling Curve"‘. ‘In aggregate, the Keeling Curve shows an annual rise in atmospheric CO2 concentrations. . . . Average concentrations rose by 1.3 to 1.4 ppmv per year until the mid-1970s, and they were increasing by more than 2 ppmv per year in the 2010s. The year-to-year increase in atmospheric CO2 concentrations is roughly proportional to the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere by the burning of fossil fuels. Between 1959 and 1982, the rate of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion doubled from approximately 2.5 billion to 5 billion tons of carbon equivalent per year. By 2020 CO2 emissions had risen to nearly 10 billion tons of carbon equivalent per year..’—Britannica)
Trump’s E.P.A. seeks to deny science that Americans discovered—Bill McKibben
It’s in this country that scientists, funded by or working for the government, came to understand the role of carbon in our atmosphere.
‘Widespread news reports on Wednesday said that the new administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, Lee Zeldin, has recommended the reversal of the long-standing federal position that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases endanger the public. That recommendation is, on the one hand, entirely predictable. . . . But the proposed reversal would be truly and deeply disgraceful—not just climate denial but basic-science denial.
In the ongoing debate about whether our current dystopia is Orwellian or Huxleyan, this is true “1984” stuff, the periodic table equivalent of “War is peace” and “Freedom is slavery.”
‘It would also be an explicit repudiation of American scientific leadership, because it’s in this country that scientists, funded by or working for the government, came to understand the role of carbon in our atmosphere. That’s a story worth retelling, if only to throw this potential recantation into sharper relief. . . .
‘[In 1957, Charles David] Keeling, who worked with the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, set up his instrument in the U.S. Weather Bureau’s newly built observatory, on the north flank of the Mauna Loa volcano, on the island of Hawaii. With funding from the National Science Foundation, he sampled the air, and what he found was that the oceans were not, as long-standing scientific wisdom had held, soaking up all the excess CO2 produced by humankind’s combustion of coal and gas and oil; instead, carbon dioxide was accumulating in the atmosphere. By 1960, he had the beginnings of what we now call the Keeling Curve, which shows the relentless (and accelerating) pace of that accumulation, the graphic depiction of our fate. That monitoring station is, for the moment, still operating, under the auspices of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
‘What that data couldn’t show was precisely when the accumulation of carbon dioxide would become a crisis. Understanding that took the hard work of another crew of American scientists, led by James Hansen. A graduate of the University of Iowa, with three degrees in the sciences, he went to work at NASA in its heyday in the early nineteen-seventies. . . . Using banks of mainframe computers from a NASA outpost on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, he spent the late nineteen-seventies and eighties building one of the world’s early climate models and compiling the most comprehensive data set of global temperatures. This work allowed him to go before Congress in the early summer of 1988 and explain that the planet was now heating up as a result of all that CO2, and that it was going to get much, much worse.
American science, in other words, had performed a remarkable feat: it had given us a timely early warning of the single greatest danger our species has ever faced.
‘I listed all the players involved because those agencies—the N.S.F., NOAA, NASA—are precisely the institutions now being told to scrub their Web sites and reëxamine their grants for projects that run counter to the Administration’s diktat on climate—and “diversity.” (On Thursday, the government began laying off hundreds of workers at NOAA.) . . .
‘The Trump Administration is resistant to science in general—an unvaccinated school-aged child died in Texas on Wednesday from the measles, even as Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.,’s Department of Health and Human Services announced that it was pausing a new COVID-vaccine project.
But it’s particularly resistant to climate science, because taking the subject seriously would mean reducing the use of fossil fuels. And fossil fuel helped pay for Trump’s election; it’s the key to his plan for ‘energy dominance.’
We learned the truth once, and now we are actively renouncing that truth. The word came down from the mountain—in this case, Mauna Loa—and now we may smash the tablets because their message asks too much of us. The Keeling Curve goes precipitously up; the curve of basic national responsibility is curving sharply down now. . . .’
newyorker.com | @NewYorker | billmckibben@bsky.social | https://billmckibben.substack.com
Africa set to reach 1.5 C climate change threshold by 2040 even under low emission scenarios—CABI Reviews
New research suggests that all five subregions of Africa will breach the 1.5 C climate change threshold—the limit stipulated by the Paris Agreement—by 2040 even under low emission scenarios.
‘New research highlighted in the journal CABI Reviews suggests that all five subregions of Africa will breach the 1.5°C climate change threshold—the limit stipulated by the Paris Agreement—by 2040 even under low emission scenarios.
‘A team of scientists, from the University of Zimbabwe, and the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) in Kenya, conducted a literature review to develop a framework for just transition pathways for Africa's agriculture towards low emission and climate resilient development under 1.5°C of global warming.
‘They found that despite Africa emitting less than 4% of global greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere, the 1.5°C climate change threshold will be approached by 2040 in all five subregions of Africa, even under low emission scenarios.
Just transition pathways for Africa's agriculture are urgently required
‘The scientists stress that just transition pathways for Africa's agriculture are urgently required for sustainable production systems that enhance food security and poverty reduction, while optimising mitigation co-benefits.
‘Professor Paul Mapfumo, Vice Chancellor of the University of Zimbabwe and lead author of the paper, said novel climate conditions are posing a serious threat to humanity and ecological systems, presenting and aggravating social injustices at different levels.
‘Distributive, procedural and recognition injustices include, the scientists say, inherent inequalities, gender disparities or narrow employment opportunities which they argue will be inevitably amplified and reinforced by the changing climate.
‘Prof Mapfumo said, "African agriculture-based livelihood systems will be invariably the most affected because of their reliance on climate-sensitive agriculture and limited adaptive capacity due to low economic development linked primarily to historical contingency.
‘"They have experienced considerable losses and damages from climate change, and this will worsen with increasing intensity of climate hazards.
‘"Neither the existing or planned incremental adaptation mechanisms, nor the anticipated benefits of migratory measures, are sufficiently comprehensive to match the pending novel climate conditions."
‘Reprogramming of the cropping, livestock and fishery systems for climate proofing
‘Prof Mapfumo and his colleagues argue that the just transition pathways for Africa's agriculture should be anchored on reprogramming of the cropping, livestock and fishery systems for climate proofing with a specific focus on a range of underpinnings.
‘These include financing the advancement of science, technology and innovation; restoring neglected or underutilised crops and livestock genetic pools; regenerating soil fertility and advancing soil health; restoring degraded land; protecting natural ecosystems and biodiversity; accessing quality education training and information technologies; and developing markets and creating novel distribution and trade opportunities.
‘Prof Mapfumo added, "Such efforts should also focus on mechanising and greening Africa's agriculture as driven by a deliberate 'Green Industrial Revolution' for the new normal induced by climate change.
‘"Sustainability of climate change response and a just transition pathway framework for Africa also lies in corresponding transformation of education systems and research capacities tailored to drive economic development for Africa."
‘The scientists conclude that the developed just transition framework offers opportunities for social inclusion, equity, building capacity for self-mobilisation and self-organisation of communities for climate action, and investments in the transition pathways for building a climate resilient agriculture towards zero poverty and meaningful contribution towards zero carbon.
‘The African Group of Negotiators Experts Support (AGNES) funded the study.’
cabi.org | @CABI_News
Got Weird? Milk Is headed for its strangest year yet—Julie Moskin (h/t Helga Recke)
America has long had an unsettled relationship with milk. Another upheaval is underway.
‘By the end of the 20th century, it seemed like cow’s milk was over, along with scrunchies and network television. Soy and nut milks had moved from health-food shelves to the supermarket to Starbucks, and oat milk was waiting in the wings to take over the nation’s lattes.
‘But in 2024, U.S. consumption of whole milk rose by 3.2 percent—only the second increase since the 1970s—while consumption of plant milk fell 5.9 percent, according to data from Circana, a market research firm. Sales of dairy milk overall were up 1.9 percent, and sales of raw milk spiked by 17.6 percent.
“‘For dairy milk to be growing at all is surprising, much less by these numbers,” said John Crawford, Circana’s dairy expert. “This reverses trends that have been in place for decades.”
‘Americans have long had a turbulent relationship with milk. It was a public-health menace of the 19th century, a patriotic staple of the mid-20th century, and a nutritional, ethical and environmental conundrum in the 21st. Yet another shift is underway. . . .
Dairy aisles are already brimming with new options and ideologies: organic, humanely raised, ultrafiltered, caffeinated, protein-enhanced and many more. (Darigold, a dairy giant based in the Northwest, has so many variations that the basic product is now labeled “Classic Milk.”)
‘. . . How did milk stage such an unlikely comeback?
‘Many Americans’ ideas of healthy eating were shaped by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s 1992 food pyramid, which remained unchanged until 2005. Concerns about fat, cholesterol and sugar put milk near the top, at just two to three servings per day.
‘Now milk is back in nutritional favor, as Americans’ priorities have shifted toward hydration, protein and healthy fats. A high-profile 2008 study—partly funded by the dairy industry—showed that chocolate milk’s benefits for athletes were equivalent to or better than those of lab-concocted performance drinks like Gatorade.
Follow-up studies have continued to show similar results, helping to rebrand milk as a natural nutrition powerhouse.
‘Plant milks have lost ground because they’re expensive, but also because of their long ingredient lists, often including sweeteners, emulsifiers and stabilizers. That places many of them in the category of ultraprocessed foods, which health-conscious and science-skeptical Americans are learning to avoid. . . .
‘On social media, Gen Z consumers who grew up with plant milks seem to be encountering “real” milk for the first time. . . .’
nytimes.com | @nytimes | @juliamoskin (Instagram)
CRISPR technologies hold enormous promise for farming and medicine—The Economist
Don’t waste it
‘The many patients who need an organ from a donor, 90% go without. About 240m people live with rare genetic diseases, most of which cannot be treated. Each year poor diets cause more than 10m early deaths. Suffering on such an immense scale can appear hopeless. However, a technique called CRISPR gene editing promises to help deal with these issues and many more—and wise regulation can spur it on.
‘CRISPR is like an editor that can rewrite DNA letter by letter or gene by gene, to remove harmful mutations or add protective ones. Clinical trials will begin this summer on pig organs edited for transplanting into humans. Last year the first new therapy went on the market. It seemingly cures sickle-cell disease and beta-thalassemia, two blood disorders that afflict millions. If ongoing clinical trials succeed, a one-off therapy could provide lifelong protection against heart attacks. Farming will benefit, too: CRISPR could raise yields or protect crops from climate change. Consumers could soon get white bread with fibre-like starch or tastier varieties of healthy but unpopular foods, such as mustard greens.
‘But as we report in our Technology Quarterly, now is a critical moment. Since CRISPR’s discovery in 2012, it has begun supplanting old ideas that never reached their potential. Gene therapy, a different technique that uses viruses to insert genes into patients, can treat many rare genetic diseases but is and will remain costly to prepare. Genetically modified (GM) crops, which borrow genes from other species, have faced misguided opposition in Europe and elsewhere. CRISPR offers an alternative to both. But if, unlike them, it is to live up to its promise, it will need to attract a continuing flow of investment—which, in turn, means chalking up some real-life successes.
For that to happen, scientists must show that they can get CRISPR into more types of cells in the body cheaply and easily. The technology would also be boosted if it could serve as a platform to create personalised therapies for people’s individual mutations. That will require new science, but it would also be catalysed by a better system of regulation. . . .’
Mindful of the threat of climate change to food security, Britain is poised to implement new liberal laws governing gene-edited foods; the EU should follow. . . . If America slows down or even goes into reverse, it will be a blow to progress—and humanity.
economist.com | @TheEconomist
Editing pigs, mice and mosquitoes may save lives—The Economist (h/t Helga Recke)
But there are possible pitfalls
‘. . . [S]ix people in America, so sick they were granted special permission, have received kidneys and hearts from pigs carefully crafted for their role as organ donors: a few porcine genes had been switched off, and several human genes added, to avoid the human body rejecting the organs. Only the two most recent recipients are still living; owing to their dire condition the first four, including Slayman, died within months. But clinical trials with healthier recipients are set to start this year. With more than 100,000 Americans waiting on a new organ, xenotransplantation is a leading example of how editing animals could benefit human society. But it is far from the only one.
‘It makes sense that the agriculture industry would toy with gene-edited animals; it is long-held practice to breed livestock that grow better and faster. CRISPR editing follows the same path. Japanese regulators have approved several CRISPRed fish; in America the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has given the nod to cattle that grow better in hot temperatures. But many scientists are focused more on improving health than increasing meat. Beyond giving people new organs, gene-edited animals could prevent the spread of diseases and possibly eradicate some of them.
‘This work is well under way for animal infections, probably because there is an obvious market for hardier livestock breeds. In 2023 Recombinetics, a gene-editing company in Minnesota, created a calf in a lab in Iowa which had been edited for protection against bovine diarrhoea virus, a pathogen dangerous to cows (and costly to farmers). Then in 2024 Genus, a genetics company outside London, established a line of gene-edited pigs immune to a virus sometimes referred to as “pig AIDS”, which is responsible for as much as $1.2bn per year in production losses in America.
‘Animals can also be edited to protect humans. Take bird flu, a virus with obvious pandemic potential. If the spread in poultry could be stopped, it would limit human exposure and give the virus fewer opportunities to mutate. In 2023 Helen Sang, a biologist at the Roslin Institute in Scotland, used CRISPR in an attempt to edit protection against bird flu into chickens.
‘To replicate in a host cell, bird flu hijacks a protein belonging to a family of three, where the two other proteins are inactive. Switching off the gene responsible for making that protein should give the chickens immunity. That is exactly what Dr Sang’s team did.
‘But things did not go quite to plan. Although the chickens seemed protected at first, the virus quickly mutated so that it could exploit the other proteins that had previously been useless to it. In the end, the team had to knock out all three genes to shut down infection, and it is unclear if the chickens can thrive when thus diminished. It was a lesson to scientists, says Dr Sang, to be careful about entering an arms race with a pathogen that humans might lose. . . .
Judging by the sum of those ambitions, animal editing will find wider use—first in agriculture, then in medicine, then possibly in the wild.
‘Genus expects their virus-resistant pigs to gain approval from the FDA this year and hit the market in 2026. eGenesis hopes to start its own pig-organ trial. But elsewhere producers of gene-edited animals will have to wait. In England market approval for edited plants is expected to be streamlined from this year under the Precision Breeding Act—but not yet for animals. That cheers some who worry the technology could be misused, for example by propping up factory farms, on which resistant animals might be used as an excuse not to improve conditions. Scientists are even discussing whether to edit livestock animals to feel less pain. Many more uncomfortable questions will no doubt spring up.
economist.com | @TheEconomist
FSSAI [India] bans use of antibiotics in production of food animals—here’s what it means—Rashmi Minocha, Rajeshwari Sinha
Earlier regulations banned the use of antibiotics only in the processing stage
‘In October 2024, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) notified Food Safety and Standards (Contaminants, toxins and Residues) First Amendment Regulations, 2024. This amendment, set to take effect from April 1, 2025, addresses crop contaminants and naturally occurring toxic substances; antimicrobials and other drugs used in veterinary practices.
‘A major highlight of this amendment is the prohibition of antibiotics at any stage of production of milk and milk products, meat and meat products, poultry and eggs, aquaculture and its products.
‘This is notably different from the previous regulation that did not permit use of antibiotics at any stage of processing. In addition, milk and milk products have been introduced as an additional sector where this prohibition would apply, expanding the scope beyond meat, poultry, and aquaculture. . . .’
downtoearth.org | @down2earthindia | @rajeshwari_s14
How to help young Africans thrive—The Economist
As the rest of the world ages, young Africans are becoming more important
‘Some generations come of age just as their countries rise economically. Think of America’s baby boomers, China’s millennials and perhaps India’s Generation Z. But there is another globally significant cohort that receives far less attention—what this week we call Africa’s “generation hustle”.
‘The sheer size of this group means that they will shape the world. Over 60% of people living in sub-Saharan Africa are younger than 25. By 2030 half of all new entrants to the “global labour force” will come from sub-Saharan Africa. By 2050 Africa will have more young people than anywhere else.
‘As countries in Europe, Asia and the Americas age and shrink, Africa’s population will continue to grow and remain youthful. Understanding this generation and their adversities is an urgent matter not just for Africans, but for everyone.
‘They are likely to surprise you. Young Africans are better educated and, thanks to the internet and social media, more aware of the wider world than their parents were. Unlike previous generations, they have no memories of colonialism. They combine an individualistic, enterprising outlook with piety and a streak of social conservatism. Much of that is bound up in a turn to Pentecostalism and its prosperity gospel, which highlights prayer as a path to material success.
‘For prosperity is what this generation lacks. They are frustrated with their shortage of opportunities. After a promising burst of activity in the 2000s, much of Africa has since endured over a decade of weak or non-existent growth. Stagnating economies are not creating enough good jobs to fulfil young people’s aspirations.
‘Young Africans have responded by finding creative ways to make ends meet. Some combine formal work with side hustles. Others juggle multiple gigs in the informal economy. But most would still much rather have a proper job. . . .’
Young Africans already know that they need prosperity to achieve their dreams. They have the can-do mindset to do their part. It is up to their governments to enable them to thrive.
economist.com | @TheEconomist
Arresting headlines
Rollins announces $1 billion ‘comprehensive’ bird flu strategy: Agriculture Brooke Rollins today announced a $1 billion comprehensive strategy to curb highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI), protect the U.S. poultry industry, and lower egg prices—The Hagstrom Report
Texas child is first confirmed death in state’s spreading measles outbreak, which has sickened more than 100 people: An unvaccinated child was the first confirmed fatality in the state’s worst measles outbreak in three decades, Texas health officials said Wednesday. The school-aged child was hospitalized in Lubbock last week, according to the Texas Department of State Health Services—Washington Post