Tag Archives: Caribbean

12th World Conference of Science Journalists in Medellín, Colombia from March 27-31, 2023

Leave a reply

I very rarely get a chance to feature science from Latin America and the Caribbean, largely due to my lack of Spanish, Portuguese, or Dutch language skills. So, you might say I’m desperate to find something, which explains, at least in part, why I’m posting about the 12th World Conference (WCSJ).

A March 29, 2023 WCSJ press release (also on EurekAlert but published March 28, 2023) describes the opening day of the 2023 conference,

The opening day [March 27, 2023] of the World Conference of Science Journalists (WCSJ) 2023 in Medellín, Colombia saw hundreds of journalists from 62 countries come together in the stunning setting of the city’s Jardin Botanico.

Over 500 attendees will gather over three days to discuss science journalism, to challenge ideas and to reinforce their professional networks and friendships. 

The day began with a keynote on biodiversity delivered by Brigitte Baptiste, a Colombian biologist and expert in biodiversity issues. And it closed with an opening ceremony and vibrant social event for attendees.

Both took place under open skies in the Jardin’s orquideorama, an open air meshwork of flower-tree structures surrounded by trees, butterflies and with a backdrop of birdsong. 

Two other plenaries focused on scientific advice and news from Amazonia. The morning’s parallel panels covered Latin American and international collaboration, with discussions from Latin American women researchers, reporting on science, health and the environment in the region and what the world can learn from Latin American and the Caribbean early warning alerts systems. The afternoon saw discussions on COVID-19, popular science writing and astronomy. 

The conference continues until Friday when there are scientific tours and excursions that provide the opportunity to visit local research teams and find out more about science in the region.

According to WWF, Colombia is the most biodiverse country per square kilometre in the world. It is also the country with the largest number of bird species — over 1,900  —  and the greatest number of butterfly species — over 3,600 or 20% butterfly species. 

Milica Momcilovic, President of the World Federation of Science Journalists said: “Independent journalism is the lifeblood of democracy and our focus at the Federation is, and will continue to be, supporting independent science journalism around the world. I have seen first hand how talented science journalists can change the world for the better and during this conference they will tell us these stories in person.”

Ximena Serrano Gil, Director of the Medellín conference said: “Colombia and Medellin are a biodiversity hotspot, an unrivalled laboratory for helping other nations adapt to climate change, a model for how to feed populations in rapidly changing tropical environments, and a cultural repository where thousands of years of indigenous peoples’ knowledge can make a lasting contribution to the wisdom of future generations.”

She continued: “The opportunity to share ideas and collaborate with others is invaluable and we must continue to create platforms that facilitate these interactions. I hope that other places in the global south will have the opportunity to host the WCSJ.” 

Over the past two decades, the World Federation of Science Journalists (WFSJ) has mounted the WCSJ every other year. The event has been held in cities across the globe, and the current edition in Medellín, Colombia, was postponed from 2021 because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Each gathering lasts about a week and attracts hundreds of participants from the WFSJ membership, including some 10,000 science writers in 51 countries.

This conference has been put together with a specific focus on the global south and on amplifying new voices from science journalist communities.

The programme has something that interests me, a talk on brain organoids according to a March 17, 2023 WCSJ press release, Note: Links have been removed,

Food security, organoid intelligence, local tours and scientific excursions

Plenary: Challenges to food security in the face of global catastrophe risks

In times of crisis and global risks, very few issues have as many factors feeding into them as food security. The integrative measures envisaged by various global players link the actions that are needed to meet the challenges we face. These should be considered in terms of technology, economics and security to ensure the future of food security, but also how science validates the environmental the environmental impact and guarantees the viability of the processes. 

Jennifer Wiegel is the Sub Regional Manager for Central America and a scientist in the Food Environment and Consumer Behavior research area of the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT [International Center for Tropical Agriculture]. Her research includes work on agri-food systems, food markets and value chains for inclusion and sustainability and public procurement. She has a Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of Wisconsin-Madison and a Master’s in Rural Sociology from the same University.

Juan Fernando Zuluaga is the National Territorial Coordinator for Antioquia. He has a  PhD in Social Sciences from the University of Antioquia and a Master in RuralEconomics from the Federal University of Ceará-Brazil. Juan is a specialist in finance from  the Latin American Autonomous University and Agricultural Engineer from the National University of Medellín.

Thomas Hartung, MD, PhD. Professor of environmental health sciences at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Whiting School of Engineering and Professor for Pharmacology and Toxicology at University of Konstanz, Germany. He is leading the revolution in toxicology to move away from 50+ year old animal testing to organoid cultures and the use of artificial intelligence.

New keynote

Climate change: How to embroider the risks that put the stability of the most vulnerable at risk

Paola Andrea Arias Gómez is Professor of the Environmental School of the Faculty of Engineering of the University of Antioquia. In 2021 she was El Espectador’s Person of the Year and received the Medellin Council’s Orchid Award for Scientific Merit.

Paola completed her undergraduate studies in Civil Engineering and a Master’s degree in Water Resources Development at the National University of Colombia, Medellin. She was Head of the Environmental School of the Faculty of Engineering of the University of Antioquia and is now a member of the First Working Group of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). She is also a member of the GEWEX Hydroclimatology Panel (GHP), the Amazon Regional Hydrogeomorphology Working Group (UNESCO) and the WCRP Science Plan Development Team (WCRP) Lighthouse Activities – My Climate Risk.

Parallel session:

In conversation: “Organoid intelligence”: the future of modern computing from human brain cells. [sic]

Biocomputing is a huge effort to compact computational power and increase its efficiency to overcome current technological limits. Researchers at Johns Hopkins delve into this technology that may one day produce computers that are faster, more efficient and more powerful than silicon-based computing and AI.

Thomas Hartung, MD, PhD. will present the team’s latest research and discuss its context, implications and what his hopes are for the field. 

Thomas Hartung is the Director of Centers for Alternatives to Animal Testing (CAAT, http://caat.jhsph.edu) of both universities. CAAT hosts the secretariat of the Evidence-based Toxicology Collaboration (http://www.ebtox.org) and manages collaborative programs on Good Read-Across Practice, Good Cell Culture Practice, Green Toxicology, Developmental Neurotoxicity, Developmental Immunotoxicity, Microphysiological Systems and Refinement.

…

I found another intriguing session (Story Corner: “Fusion Energy and Climate Change – The Conversation begins” by ITER) which was held on Tuesday, March 28, 2023 at 9:30 – 10:00 am during the coffee break. (For more about fusion energy, see my October 28, 2022 posting “Overview of fusion energy scene“.)

While it’s too late to sign up for the conference, you might find perusing the programme schedule provides some insight into issues being faced my science journalists outside the Canada/US bubble.

Sunscreens: 2018 update

2 Replies

I don’t usually concern myself with SPF numbers on sunscreens as my primary focus has been on the inclusion of nanoscale metal particles (these are still considered safe). However, a recent conversation with a dental hygienist and coincidentally tripping across a June 19, 2018 posting on the Schrodinger’s Cat blog shortly after the convo. has me reassessing my take on SPF numbers (Note: Links have been removed),

…

So, what’s the deal with SPF? A recent interview of Dr Steven Q Wang, M.D., chair of The Skin Cancer Foundation Photobiology Committee, finally will give us some clarity. Apparently, the SPF number, be it 15, 30, or 50, refers to the amount of UVB protection that that sunscreen provides. Rather than comparing the SPFs to each other, like we all do at the store, SPF is a reflection of the length of time it would take for the Sun’s UVB radiation to redden your skin (used exactly as directed), versus if you didn’t apply any sunscreen at all. In ideal situations (in lab settings), if you wore SPF 30, it would take 30 times longer for you to get a sunburn than if you didn’t wear any sunscreen.

What’s more, SPF 30 is not nearly half the strength of SPF 50. Rather, SPF 30 allows 3% of UVB rays to hit your skin, and SPF 50 allows about 2% of UVB rays to hit your skin. Now before you say that that is just one measly percent, it actually is much more. According to Dr Steven Q. Wang, SPF 30 allows around 1.5 times more UV radiation onto your skin than SPF 50. That’s an actual 150% difference [according to Wang’s article “… SPF 30 is allowing 50 percent more UV radiation onto your skin.”] in protection.

…

Schrodinger’s Cat (author of the ‘eponymous’ blog) offers a good overview of the topic in a friendly, informative fashion albeit I found the ‘percentage’ to be a bit confusing. (S)he also provides a link to a previous posting about the ingredients in sunscreens (I do have one point of disagreement with Schrodinger’s Cat regarding oxybenzone) as well as links to Dr. Steven Q. Wang’s May 24, 2018 Ask the Expert article about sunscreens and SPF numbers on skincancer.org. You can find the percentage under the ‘What Does the SPF Number Mean?’ subsection, in the second paragraph.

Ingredients: metallic nanoparticles and oxybenzone

The use of metallic nanoparticles  (usually zinc oxide and/or (titanium dioxide) in sunscreens was loathed by civil society groups, in particular Friends of the Earth (FOE) who campaigned relentlessly against their use in sunscreens. The nadir for FOE was in February 2012 when the Australian government published a survey showing that 13% of the respondents were not using any sunscreens due to their fear of nanoparticles. For those who don’t know, Australia has the highest rate of skin cancer in the world. (You can read about the debacle in my Feb. 9, 2012 posting.)

At the time, the only civil society group which supported the use of metallic nanoparticles in sunscreens was the Environmental Working Group (EWG).  After an examination of the research they, to their own surprise, came out in favour (grudgingly) of metallic nanoparticles. (The EWG were more concerned about the use of oxybenzone in sunscreens.)

Over time, the EWG’s perspective has been adopted by other groups to the point where sunscreens with metallic nanoparticles are commonplace in ‘natural’ or ‘organic’ sunscreens.

As for oxybenzones, Schrodinger’s Cat in a May 23, 2018 posting about sunscreen ingredients notes this (Note: Links have been removed),

Oxybenzone – Chemical sunscreen, protects from UV damage. Oxybenzone belongs to the chemical family Benzophenone, which are persistent (difficult to get rid of), bioaccumulative (builds up in your body over time), and toxic, or PBT [or: Persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic substances (PBTs)]. They are a possible carcinogen (cancer-causing agent), endocrine disrupter; however, this is debatable. Also could cause developmental and reproductive toxicity, could cause organ system toxicity, as well as could cause irritation and potentially toxic to the environment.

It seems that the tide is turning against the use of oxybenzones (from a July 3, 2018 article by Adam Bluestein for Fast Company; Note: Links have been removed),

On July 3 [2018], Hawaii’s Governor, David Ig, will sign into law the first statewide ban on the sale of sunscreens containing chemicals that scientists say are damaging the Earth’s coral reefs. Passed by state legislators on May 1 [2018], the bill targets two chemicals, oxybenzone and octinoxate, which are found in thousands of sunscreens and other skincare products. Studies published over the past 10 years have found that these UV-filtering chemicals–called benzophenones–are highly toxic to juvenile corals and other marine life and contribute to the fatal bleaching of coral reefs (along with global warming and runoff pollutants from land). (A 2008 study by European researchers estimated that 4,000 to 6,000 tons of sunblock accumulates in coral reefs every year.) Also, though both substances are FDA-approved for use in sunscreens, the nonprofit Environmental Working Group notes numerous studies linking oxybenzone to hormone disruption and cell damage that may lead to skin cancer. In its 2018 annual sunscreen guide, the EWG found oxybenzone in two-thirds of the 650 products it reviewed.

The Hawaii ban won’t take effect until January 2021, but it’s already causing a wave of disruption that’s affecting sunscreen manufacturers, retailers, and the medical community.

For starters, several other municipalities have already or could soon join Hawaii’s effort. In May [2018], the Caribbean island of Bonaire announced a ban on chemicals sunscreens, and nonprofits such as the Sierra Club and Surfrider Foundation, along with dive industry and certain resort groups, are urging legislation to stop sunscreen pollution in California, Colorado, Florida, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Marine nature reserves in Mexico already prohibit oxybenzone-containing sunscreens, and the U.S. National Park Service website for South Florida, Hawaii, U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa recommends the use of “reef safe” sunscreens, which use natural mineral ingredients–zinc oxide or titanium oxide–to protect skin.

Makers of “eco,” “organic,” and “natural” sunscreens that already meet the new standards are seizing on the news from Hawaii to boost their visibility among the islands’ tourists–and to expand their footprint on the shelves of mainland retailers. This past spring, for example, Miami-based Raw Elements partnered with Hawaiian Airlines, Honolulu’s Waikiki Aquarium, the Aqua-Aston hotel group (Hawaii’s largest), and the Sheraton Maui Resort & Spa to get samples of its reef-safe zinc-oxide-based sunscreens to their guests. “These partnerships have had a tremendous impact raising awareness about this issue,” says founder and CEO Brian Guadagno, who notes that inquiries and sales have increased this year.

…

As Bluestein notes there are some concerns about this and other potential bans,

“Eliminating the use of sunscreen ingredients considered to be safe and effective by the FDA with a long history of use not only restricts consumer choice, but is also at odds with skin cancer prevention efforts […],” says Bayer, owner of the Coppertone brand, in a statement to Fast Company. Bayer disputes the validity of studies used to support the ban, which were published by scientists from U.S. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, the nonprofit Haereticus Environmental Laboratory, Tel Aviv University, the University of Hawaii, and elsewhere. “Oxybenzone in sunscreen has not been scientifically proven to have an effect on the environment. We take this issue seriously and, along with the industry, have supported additional research to confirm that there is no effect.”

Johnson & Johnson, which markets Neutrogena sunscreens, is taking a similar stance, worrying that “the recent efforts in Hawaii to ban sunscreens that contain oxybenzone may actually adversely affect public health,” according to a company spokesperson. “Science shows that sunscreens are a key factor in preventing skin cancer, and our scientific assessment of the lab studies done to date in Hawaii show the methods were questionable and the data insufficient to draw factual conclusions about any impact on coral reefs.”

Terrified (and rightly so) about anything scaring people away from using sunblock, The American Academy of Dermatology, also opposes Hawaii’s ban. Suzanne M. Olbricht, president of the AADA, has issued a statement that the organization “is concerned that the public’s risk of developing skin cancer could increase due to potential new restrictions in Hawaii that impact access to sunscreens with ingredients necessary for broad-spectrum protection, as well as the potential stigma around sunscreen use that could develop as a result of these restrictions.”

The fact is that there are currently a large number of widely available reef-safe products on the market that provide “full spectrum” protection up to SPF50–meaning they protect against both UVB rays that cause sunburns as well as UVA radiation, which causes deeper skin damage. SPFs higher than 50 are largely a marketing gimmick, say advocates of chemical-free products: According to the Environmental Working Group, properly applied SPF 50 sunscreen blocks 98% of UVB rays; SPF 100 blocks 99%. And a sunscreen lotion’s SPF rating has little to do with its ability to shield skin from UVA rays.

…

I notice neither Bayer nor Johnson & Johnson nor the American Academy of Dermatology make mention of oxybenzone’s possible role as a hormone disruptor.

Given the importance that coral reefs have to the environment we all share, I’m inclined to support the oxybenzone ban based on that alone. Of course, it’s conceivable that metallic nanoparticles may also have a deleterious effect on coral reefs as their use increases. It’s to be hoped that’s not the case but if it is, then I’ll make my decisions accordingly and hope we have a viable alternative.

As for your sunscreen questions and needs, the Environment Working Group (EWG) has extensive information including a product guide on this page (scroll down to EWG’s Sunscreen Guide) and a discussion of ‘high’ SPF numbers I found useful for my decision-making.

Hexanal and preventing (or diminishing) fruit spoilage

Leave a reply

More mangoes thanks to an Indian-Sri Lankan-Canadian nanotechnologyresearch project is a Feb. 9, 2015 posting where I highlighted (not for the first time) a three country research project utilizing hexanal in boxes for fruit (mango) storage,

I’ve been wondering what happened since I posted about this ‘mango’ project some years ago (my June 21, 2012 posting and my Nov. 1, 2012 posting) so, it’s nice to get an update from this Fresh Fruit Portal Feb. 4, 2015 posting,

Developed by Canadian, Indian and Sri Lankan researchers in a collaborative project funded by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), the nanotech mango boxes are said to improve the fruit’s resilience and therefore boost quality over long shipping distances.

The project – which also includes the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, India and the Industrial Technical Institute, Sri Lanka – has tested the use of the bio-compound hexanal, an artificially synthesized version of a natural substance produced by injured plants to reduce post-harvest losses.

In the Feb. 9, 2015 posting I was featuring the project again as it had received new funding,

  • Researchers from the University of Guelph, Canada, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, India, and the Industrial Technical Institute, Sri Lanka, have shown that a natural compound known as hexanal delays the ripening of mangos. Using nanotechnology, the team will continue to develop hexanal-impregnated packaging and biowax coatings to improve the fruit’s resilience during handling and shipping for use in Asia, Africa, and the Caribbean. It will also expand its research to include other fruit and look at ways to commercialize the technologies.

New funding will allow the research teams to further develop the new technologies and involve partners who can bring them to market to reach greater numbers of small-holder farmers.

A Dec. 29, 2015 article (Life of temperate fruits in orchards extended, thanks to nanotech) in The Hindu newspaper provides an update on the collaboration,

Talking to mediapersons after taking part in a workshop on ‘Enhanced Preservation of Fruits using Nanotechnology Project’ held at the Horticultural College and Research Institute, Periyakulam near here on Monday [Dec. 28, 2015], he [K.S. Subramanian, Professor, Department of Nano Science and Technology, TNAU, Coimbatore] said countries like Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Kenya and West Indies will benefit. Post-harvest loss in African countries was approximately 80 per cent, whereas it was 25 to 30 per cent in India, he said.

With the funds sanctioned by Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development and International Development Research Centre, Canada, the TN Agricultural University, Coimbatore, involving scientists in University of Guelph, Canada, Industrial Technology Institute, Colombo, Sokoine University of Agriculture, Tanzania, University of Nairobi [Kenya], University of West Indies, Trinidad and Tobago, have jointly developed Hexanal formulation, a nano-emulsion, to minimise post harvest loss and extend shelf life of mango.

Field trials have been carried out successfully in Dharmapuri and Krishnagiri on five varieties – Neelam, Bangalura, Banganapalle, Alphonso and Imam Pasand. Pre-harvest spray of Hexanal formulation retained fruits in the trees for three weeks and three more weeks in storage.

Extending life to six to eight weeks will benefit exporters immensely as they required at least six weeks to take fruits to European and the US market. Existing technologies were sufficient to retain fruits up to four weeks only. Domestic growers too can delay harvest and tap market when in demand.

…

In a companion Dec. 29, 2015 article (New technologies will enhance income of farmers) for The Hindu, benefits for the Indian agricultural economy were extolled,

Nano technology is an ideal tool to extend the shelf life and delay in ripening mango in trees, but proper bio-safety tests should be done before introducing it to farmers, according to Deputy Director General of ICAR N.K. Krishnakumar.

Inaugurating a workshop on Enhanced Preservation of Fruits using Nanotechnology Project held at the Horticultural College and Research Institute at Periyakulam near here on Monday [Dec. 28, 2015], he said that bio safety test was very important before implementing any nano-technology. Proper adoption of new technologies would certainly enhance the income of farmers, he added.

…

Demand for organic fruits was very high in foreign countries, he said, adding that Japan and Germany were prepared to buy large quantum of organic pomegranate. Covering fruits in bags would ensure uniform colour and quality, he said.

He appealed to scale down use of chemical pesticides and fertilizers to improve quality and taste. He said dipping mango in water mixed with salt will suffice to control fungus.

Postgraduate and research students should take up a problem faced by farmers and find a solution to it by working in his farm. His thesis could be accepted for offering degree only after getting feedback from that farmer. Such measure would benefit college, students and farmers, Mr. Krishnakumar added.

…

It’s good to get an update on the project’s progress and, while it’s not clear from the excerpts I have here, they are testing hexanal with on fruit other than mangoes.