Sunset

Sun setting over the far ridge. Click to enlarge.

Curtailed Cognition—Part 1

The results of recent research by Yale University on a population of 20,000 Chinese people over the time span of 2010-2014 is very sobering, because the study is the first to demonstrate that air pollution reduces one's cognitive ability. We've known for decades that air pollution is physically damaging to our lungs, but now the physical damage to the brain has also been shown. Our intelligence is being threatened.

Some 95% of the world's population is known to breathe unsafe air. That problem is particularly acute in China, whose air pollution has been shown to be three times greater than the upper limits described by the UN's World Health Organization; which is why the Yale study was conducted there. The researchers demonstrated that air pollution caused a significant drop in test scores—particularly in language and math—creating the equivalent of a lost year in the average person's education.

So now we have further evidence of the health-damaging impact of air pollution. What do these results mean? How great is this threat? What should we do about it? Of course, the rational conclusion would be to take dramatic and immediate measures to reduce air pollution. Don't hold your breath, however (no intentional pun, here). Since most all forms of pollution and environmental degradation disproportionately impact the poor, we can't expect politicians—who owe so much to the rich—to do much of anything about the problem.

In related areas, very little has been done to slow global warming or the use of pesticides, so we can't expect much to be done about air pollution either. Politicians seem to be minimally concerned about the future, since the impact of their actions—harmful or helpful—often takes many years to bear fruit. Their attention is on the next quarter's bottom line, and their chances of getting reelected, not on distant events to come.

So what will the future bring, if air pollution persists? Are we doomed? Will we be getting increasingly dumber? What harm will we incur as a species, if we don't act? No one knows the answers to these questions.

Well, there's one thing that can be counted on: the pharmaceutical industry will swing into action by developing drugs to deal with the curtailed cognitive symptoms—especially if those drugs need to be taken for the rest of one's life (thereby ensuring continued income for big pharma). Our culture is good at treating symptoms—rather than root causes. We already know that citizens' lungs get messed up with air pollution, so big pharma has answered the call by developing inhalers. Similarly, we have medicines to treat diabetes and heart disease—all aimed at easing the pain and limitations of these problems, without the need to improve lifestyles. Drug companies make lots of money when industry makes people sick. 
 
So, will big pharma come up with medications to counter the brain damage caused by air pollution? It's a good bet that they will. We already have medications to treat the symptoms of Alzheimer's disease and other brain problems. We can count on the pharmaceutical industry to rescue us from having to do much about air pollution.

I am currently taking an online course on modern diseases and debilitation of old age, which makes another cogent point on this issue. The Dutch professor of my course, a physician, spent a few years in the emergency ward of a hospital, often treating the aftermath of accidents, such as when vehicles collide. He later went into family medicine and often found himself dealing with emergency situations brought on by heart attacks and strokes.

It occurred to him that he was repeatedly faced with health accidents that were brought on, not by a sudden automobile crash, but in the wake of a few decades of unhealthy living. In either case, he was dealing with a calamity—one that either happened in the ER from a crash a few hours earlier, or the other due to a gradual crash over decades. Are we creating a slow-motion crash of brain damage from air pollution—a crash that is as avoidable as heart attacks and diabetes, which could be dealt with by creating a healthy lifestyle?

More on dumbing down next time...

AI Goes to Mars

Six years ago NASA gently lowered the rover Curiosity into Mars' Gale Crater. It was a risky landing, that entailed lowering the rover onto the surface from a sky crane that slowly and tenderly deposited Curiosity, disconnected from it, and then flew off at a distance and crashed itself. Every NASA employee—as well as millions around the world—chewed their fingernails, until Curiosity radioed back that it was safely down.

Ever since that ground-breaking day, the rover has wandered about Gale Crater at the breakneck speed of 0.02 mph (0.03 kph), scooping up soil samples, drilling holes in rocks, and analyzing the compounds found. Its mission is to evaluate Mars' habitability, i.e., could the Red Planet ever have had conditions that would have allowed life to exist there? Can we detect the signs of those conditions today? I have blogged previously that NASA has learned from its 1970s Viking missions not to try to directly measure life on Mars (due to the ambiguity of the measurements), but to simply try to determine if Mars' climate ever was hospitable for life.

Three years ago NASA upgraded the software in Curiosity's computer to give it artificial intelligence (AI) capability, which is presently operable. Thus the rover now can function autonomously, similar to the self-driving cars and trucks currently being tested here on Earth. Prior to this upgrade, Curiosity had to wait for NASA scientists to order its every movement. Humans decided its targets, based on photos taken by the rover, ordered Curiosity to take certain actions, reviewed the results, and then sent the next commands. 
This procedure made for a lot of downtime, as the rover waited for further instructions.

Now with AI, Curiosity can act on its own, much faster and with greater accuracy than before. It gets occasional overall directions from Earth, but attends to all the details on its own. This is similar to the autonomy that self-driving Earth vehicles have, but without the worry that the rover will crash at high speed, or run over any people—as has happened on this planet with autonomous vehicles.

In NASA's typically cautious manner, the upgrade to AI capability was slowly and carefully tested, using an Earthbound twin to Curiosity, that scientists can play with, at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California. And true to NASA's propensity to generate creative acronyms, the new AI software is called AEGIS*, for Autonomous Exploration for Gathering Increased Science. It makes me wonder if NASA may also have an acronym-naming group, possibly called Group of Radical English-Adept Technicians for NASA Acronym Mission Epithets (GREATNAME)? May Curiosity roll on for many more years.

*Aegis is the name of the battle shield of Zeus, and usually refers to the supportive backing given a person or organization.

Shedding Shoes

Growing up in America's Midwest, my family did not have the custom of removing our shoes upon entering the house. My mom might scold me for not being mindful about wiping my shoes on the doormat, but we kept our foot apparel on indoors.

I've been exposed to other cultures' customs in my adult years—of shedding my shoes upon going into another's home, or into religious buildings. I have come to appreciate the ritual. Recently I was pondering this shoe removal routine and found myself wondering how it may have come about, or what the reasons for doing it may be.

We often follow our culture's customs without taking a deeper look into why we do so. Is it just because we've always done it that way, or are there good reasons? After some contemplation on the question and some internet research, I offer this list as grounds for shedding your shoes upon entering an interior space.

To begin with, it helps keep the place cleaner. By not tracking in outdoor contaminants—dirt, disease, and toxins—one's home is able to remain more tidy and healthy. We may love the outdoors, but do we really want to track in its dust and dog shit?

Many cultures—particularly in the East—have long had the habit of leaving footwear at the door. People in these cultures also are more likely to sit on the floor, so as in the first reason above, a clean floor is more inviting to sit on. It's a good idea to be sensitive to this convention and follow suit.

A third, similar reason is that it's an act of respect to remove one's shoes, before entering another's private space—especially if it happens to be a spiritual space. And shouldn't all homes be spiritual?

A fourth motivation is that it's more comfortable to have your shoes off. One can be more relaxed. It can even be healthier to patter around in bare feet or socks, rather than keeping on one's clunky and stiff shoes or boots.

A fifth reason is the reduction of wear and tear on rugs and furnishings. Japanese floors often are covered with tatami mats, which are not very durable. Additionally, if I have removed my my shoes and find myself sitting in a big, snug chair or couch, my legs seem to naturally fold up, as my feet come up and get cozy. I would never do that with boots on.

Finally, pausing to remove one's shoes before entering another's home or sanctuary, is a great way to mindfully think about what you will be engaging in next. Sometimes we arrive a little tense from the drive or slogging through inclement weather. Do we want to drag those stresses inside, or leave them at the door? By hesitating, taking a couple of deep breaths, greeting our host warmly and respectfully, as we sit to doff shoes, we offer ourselves a useful psychological separation between the outside (maybe a bit frenetic) world and the inside (hopefully peaceful) space. Hey, shedding shoes might lead to world peace!

Io

Jupiter's moon Io, showing a volcanic eruption of organic material from the surface. NASA. Click to enlarge.