We really should put this climate scheme to the test
You report new plans to test iron fertilisation of oceans to promote phytoplankton growth for carbon capture purposes (3 July, p 13). Given the projected environmental challenges facing us, it is worth doing a truly major, multinational experiment to see if we could actually figure out how to do this safely and well.
A very large-scale effort could be conducted quite economically in the vast Southern Ocean by deploying a continuous round-trip chain of satellite-controlled, self-propelled . These could tow huge, seagoing rubber bladders filled with iron fertilisation solution.
These would carry instruments to take and preserve samples and to sense and transmit data from the surface layer. They would also bring, release and retrieve autonomous subs to detect and record underwater effects.
This approach avoids the gigantic costs and limitations of on-scene oceanographic research vessel time, which frustrated earlier efforts. I think seasonality could be a factor in how iron fertilisation works, so let’s do a test over the course of at least a year. Safeguards include situating the large research grid as remotely as possible, where the water mixing is sufficient to soon “erase” undesirable outcomes.
Business as usual is a missed opportunity (1)
Graham Lawton ponders the transport-related environmental costs of driving his cat to the vet amid the pandemic, rather than using the bus (3 July, p 24). This is part of a wider discussion on his fading hope that lockdowns would persuade us to lead greener lives, especially through decreased travel. The push to get back to offices seems a major missed opportunity on this front.
Working from home not only reduces the pollution produced by cars and other forms of transport used to travel to work, it also cuts the cost of fuel and parking to workers. A lot less office space would be needed. This could reduce rental and electricity costs, and the vacant office space could be used for housing homeless people and inner-city residents.
Business as usual is a missed opportunity (2)
Lawton cites research that blames the fossil fuel industry for sending the message that action by individuals is the answer to climate change. Well, it is the main answer. I don’t remember the oil industry trying to get us to drive more or heat our homes more. It is consumers who demanded gasoline and heating oil.
One way to reduce bias in decision making
The interview with behavioural scientists Daniel Kahneman and Olivier Sibony described a system that seems similar to the trade-off studies, also known as figure of merit analysis, used by engineering teams to help reduce bias and arrive at an optimal decision (19 June, p 40).
A trade-off study solicits individual opinions of several subject-matter experts in isolation, with the results compiled into a cost-benefit matrix that can then be reduced to a score for each of the competing options. Each expert is ignorant of the opinion of the others surveyed.
Every trade-off study results in a document that describes the process and the winning solution. It isn’t perfect, but it does help reduce the effects of group-think and domineering personalities.
Time for a new name for us, the human survivors
Further to the new developments in the tangled tale of human evolution (3 July, p 10). Reconstructions of the faces of Neanderthals and other early humans show they didn’t look significantly different to current Homo sapiens. As the so-called modern human is the only variant left standing, perhaps we should rename ourselves Homo sapiens var. homicidius.
Let's give our booster jabs to those in need (1)
Regarding questions of getting vaccines to the wider world (22 May, p 8). Amid the talk of a third, booster shot in the UK, surely it is better to send these jabs to lower-income, under-vaccinated nations than for richer ones like the UK to hog supplies?
I would seriously consider refusing my booster if I was sure someone in an under-vaccinated region would get it.
Let's give our booster jabs to those in need (2)
Low-dose (using a smaller dose but putting it into skin rather than muscle) is effective for some viral inoculations. I was successfully vaccinated against rabies in this way, at one-tenth of the usual dose.
This approach is potentially very useful for vaccinating large numbers of people and increasing vaccine cover. Given the need to protect so many people against covid-19 in a short time, why does there seem to be so little trial data or research on this method?
The gender disparities of covid-19 must be studied
You report that women are developing fatigue-related long covid to a greater degree than men (26 June, p 10). Danny Altmann cites the fact that women are more prone to certain autoimmune conditions than men. Hence gender differences in the immune system’s behaviour would seem to be the front runner when seeking an explanation.
Medical science has recorded many instances of certain diseases being more common in one gender than another. Examples include migraine, Alzheimer’s disease, lupus and Parkinson’s disease. In addition, at the University of Southampton, UK, has found that covid-19-related lung damage occurs more frequently in women.
When we know why these gender disparities occur, we will have a big clue as to what is going on, not only in long covid, but in other, similar diseases too.
Let's use algorithms to detect new diseases
Your feature on the algorithms that run our lives discussed some of those used for medical triage (19 June, p 34). An interesting extension of this would be for such algorithms to watch for clusters of cases of illness that, when looked at together, don’t fall quite so convincingly into a given diagnosis.
This could, for example, detect emerging viral variants, new causes of disease or new types of illness that would take far longer for human analysts to notice.