Hand axes reform human moving history

My first thought was: If this new discovery of stone tools at the Persian Gulf is right, and we are all Arabs, somehow, this will cause huge trouble on my next entry into the US. “Did you travel via an Arab country?” – well, not personally, but… you know, relatives…

The finding of British and German archaeologists, that humans might have left Africa much earlier (about 130000 years ago) got heavy attention in the German press. The Süddeutsche Zeitung explains, why the scientists can’t be completely sure – for one reason, no bones. So, the stone tools might not even belong to Homo sapiens but, perhaps, Homo erectus. I liked the article, especially because it describes briefly how green and fertile the Arab peninsula was at the time – though I could have used some further view. But the same goes for most other coverage I found:

Welt, Stern,Hamburger Abendblatt, the Austrian Standard, RP online, Handelsblatt, all covered it and the local Südwest-Presse, has a unique profile-like (though short) article (“Picnic spot kept a secret”) about the lead scientist of the study, from the University of Tübingen. The Basler Zeitung (Tagesanzeiger) included quotes of a scientist from the university of Zurich.

Spiegel.Online got some unique quotes of the German archaeologist – but, again, no further, independent quotes! But it is possible, to do so, proves Anke Brodmerkel for the Frankfurter Rundschau: She asked a scientist from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, who was not involved in the study, for his view on the data. And this way, she was able to give her story a unique perspective – the findings might have consequences for the theory of sexual contact of Neanderthals and Homo sapiens. Now it looks like they coexisted much longer than previously thought. That raises a question. Do the the genetic data show a higher degree of sexual contact. Zeit.online (Sven Stockrahm) asked the same independent scientist, and, even more, his articles raises the question, how the humans, who once used these stone tools, were related to us and how they contributed to our genetic lineage – “It’s not [yet] enough flesh on the bones” to prove a new theory of human migration, the scientist is quoted.

Also: Dioxin’s not the most urgent problem of the food industry

In the midst of the Dioxin panic in Germany, the Tagesspiegel (Hartmut Wewetzer) had a (long!) comment, trying to give a rational view on the relative risks of being a consumer. He argues against such comfortable myths as that “organic” food is automatically more safe. He tries to raise awareness that it is impossible to guarantee food products free of Dioxin. The substance originates when people burn stuff and accumulates in the environment and in the food chain. And isn’t it right, that tons of sugar in every yoghurt might be more harmful than a picogramm of Dioxin? Wewetzer leads the reader, to think beyond the daily headlines, gets things into perspective and argues against empty-headed panic.

The German Gorch Fock in choppy seas

Also: Strange Rituals on Gorch Fock

After the recent death of a soldier at the German navy training sailing ship Gorch Fock the public in Germany takes a close look at the teaching practice and initiation rituals on board. The captain of the Gorch Fock had been put on leave and most of the press now deals with the question, whether this move by the minister of defense was appropriate or whether he should better await the results of an independent examination. Stern.online’s Frank Ochmann asked in a comment, why groups of people (especially in the military, boarding schools, scout camps or secret societies like the Free Masons) tend to invent strange and sometimes brutal rituals and what role the rituals have for the social group. He explains, how the “value” of being a member of the group rises with the severity of the sacrifice during the inititiation ritus. And he also explains, why the Bundeswehr – without any question – needs to prevent such rituals: The theme of the SS was “Loyalty is my honor”. One more remark: I very much liked, that at the end of the article, Ochmann gives hints to further (scientific!) litererature on the topic.

Sascha Karberg

It is by far the most popular Egyptian artifact in German museums – the 3,400 year old bust of Nefertiti, the wife of Pharaoh Echnaton. The German archaeologist Ludwig Borchardt discovered the bust in 1912, and brought it to Berlin in compliance with the Egyptian law at that time. Nevertheless, from time to time (in 2009, e.g.), Zahi Hawass, head of Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities (SCA), demands the return of the bust – as once again on Monday. And again, the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation rejected the request.

Hawass accuses archaeologist Borchardt of dishonesty to Egyptian officials about the importance of the bust, and believes it was taken illicitly.  The bust is not the only artifact Hawass wants back. Other famous discoveries bywestern archaeologists, like the Rosetta Stone in the British Museum, have been pursued, too. But, according to the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation, the latest letter is not an official state request because it lacks the sign of Egyptian Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif. Nevertheless, it got much print in Germany – as always occurs when Zahi Hawass starts his media machine.

The Süddeutsche Zeitung had (with some, it appears, exclusive quotes) the most informative article, explaining the current debate, the history of the bust, the political moves of Egypt to repatriate its antique artifacts, and it provides background about Nefertiti, too.

The Financial Times Deutschland, though lacking a science section in the print edition, had a substantial Nefertiti story in the science part of the online edition. It adds some paragraphs about the past discussions, whether the bust might be a forgery – though, I don’t know, why, because the rumors had been settled via CT scans and isotope analysis.

The Hamburger Abendblatt bothered to ask a local expert (of the Egyptian museum in Hannover) about the news. The same did the local boulevard BZ (Berliner Zeitung) in one of its two articles on the topic. Of course, the experts opinion is, that Nefertiti belongs to Germany. (Did someone try to call an Egyptian other than Hawass or even an independent expert from, say, Australia, perhaps?)

The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, has only a couple of paragraphs about the years and years of research and restoration, the special encasement and technological knowledge that helped to ensure the preservation of the bust. And it asks what would happen to the bust, if it was placed in a less than optimal museum in Cairo and sent on tour like the remnants of Tutenchamun, the stepson of Nefertiti.

The Austrian Wiener Zeitung provides the facts on the Nefertiti case but also compares it to events surrounding the feathered headdress of the Aztec king Montezuma in the Ethnological Museum of Vienna, which had been requested as a historically and spiritually important value for the Mexican people.

The Handelsblatt (here), the Austrian Standard (here), Bild (here) did not have any more information than was spread via dpa.

The Frankfurter Rundschau had a diffuse political comment, partly Hawass profile, partly historical excourse into colonialism.

RP online (Rheinische Post) had a report about “our Nefretiti” in the cultural section.

Die Welt had a sappy comment, comparing Hawass with Cato, the Latin politician, who consitently repeated his wish to destroy Carthage in all his speeches.

.

AND: Thanks for a candid comment!

Every year, the federal and local governments spent millions of Euros for “science years”, “science fairs”, “science cities” in the name of “communicating science to the public” – aka “create acceptance”. 2001 life sciences, 2005 physics and so on. In 2011 the theme is “Research for Our Health”. (At least in Germany. According to the UNESCO it’s the year of chemistry, but don’t be confused…)

Of course, folks need an opening ceremony with speeches of more or less important people, a public debate (though not too controversial), and some champagne and glamour, if you please. Journalists are invited and are supposed to quote lame speeches about how important …(*)  is for our society (*please fill in the science section of the corresponding year). Thanks to Kai Kupferschmidt, I wasn’t forced to read such inane reporting. He wrote an acid-tongued comment about the dead boring ceremony, announcing the year of health sciences, for the Tagesspiegel. Hope this helps people rethink, whether it really makes any sense to just repeat the same stuff every single year.

Sascha Karberg

Would be much easier, if dioxin contaminated eggs tinted green

In just weeks a dioxin scandal has led to the closing of thousands of farms. Dioxin at levels that, while not quite toxic, are higher than allowed were found in eggs, chicken and pork, some already sold and consumed in Germany and some neighboring countries. The cause was contamination of animal feed. A German company delivered it, and had used cheap industrial grease as a fat supplement in fodder. Because the source of the dioxin in the grease wasn’t at first clear, officials closed thousands of farms and stopped the delivery of their animal products. It took weeks to find the source of the dioxin: The company derived the product from used french fry oil intended for industrial use only (for the production of biodiesel).

On one hand, this is in most part a topic for political journalists, and most of the published articles deal with responsibilities of governmental food control agencies and the inherently unhealthy production structure of “modern” agriculture. But on the other hand, it is also a topic for science journalists, because people needed to understand about toxic and non-toxic dioxin concentrations, how dioxin acts in the human body, etc.

Here are some links to articles, how German language newspapers dealt with the dioxin scandal – it seems, that more consumer, economic or political journalists then science journalists wrote the background articles:

Die Zeit has a commentary in the science section, relies on dpa sometimes, too (here), but wrote about the possible source of the dioxin source early.

Spiegel-Online: A dioxin Q&A, a whole special section

Die Welt wrote, how entwined the production chanels of food and fuel are – and that a mix-up is not a surprise.

Without mentioning the ongoing scandal in Germany at all, the Austrian Standard had a short piece about the rising environmental contamination with toxins like dioxin, according to a study from the German federal institute for risk assessment (BfR).

Though a little bit of a side track, the Süddeutsche Zeitung asks (and tests the evidence): Is organic farming the better choice? But Katrin Blawat had an in-depths article about dioxin and the toxic potential of the substance and how scientists define critical toxic values. And the science section published a statement from scientists against the industrialization of agriculture.

The Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung (Ulf von Rauchhaupt) provided a background on the toxicity of dioxin and gave an update of the research in the field.

Also: Fishy Breed

The Neue Zürcher Zeitung had an interesting article about the (environmental) consequences for the scientific achievement of artificial salmon breeding.

Also worth to be mentioned: The Rumor Virus

The Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung (Volker Stollorz) had a piece – about what could be a newly found, dangerous retrovirus that has already infected millions of Americans, or merely an interesting laboratory artifact. According to the Whittemore-Peterson-Institut in Reno, Nevada, the “Xenotropic Murine Leukemia Virus related Virus“ (XMRV) cause Chronic Fatigue Syndrom (CFS). At least, in a study of 101 CFS patients, 68 carried the virus. But even more interesting, the virus was found in 8 out of 218 blood samples of healthy volunteers, too. The head of the institute, Judy Mikovits, estimates, that “20 million Americans“, might be infected. Blood banks got hysterical, fearing the spread of another potentially pathogenic retro virus (XMRV is a relative to HIV). On Facebook, people started a „Global Action against XMRV“ campaign. Desperate CFS patients started to self-medicate HIV-drugs, hoping to get rid of XMRV, ignoring the huge side effects of the drugs. And diagnostic companies start to sell XMRV tests ($549 each), based on patents already ensured by Mikovits.

BUT: Not a single laboratory in Europe could find XMRV in human tissue, so far!  The explanation might be, that XMRV, a harmless companion of mice, could indeed have crossed the species barrier from mice to human – but only in the lab. The article describes a scenario, where the murine XMRV developed in immune-deficient mice into a strain, capable of infecting human cell lines (it was found in a prostate cancer cell line 22RV1). A few years later, a scientist at the Cleveland clinic in Ohio found XMRV in prostate tissue samples from prostate cancer patients. This catched Mikovits’ attention, she wanted to test the blood of CFS patients ; and she ordered a sample of the XMRV infected cell line – a mistake, asks Stollorz? The problem is, that it frequently happens, that human tissue catches mice viruses if incubated in the same cell culture room. The Center for Disease Control in Atlanta couldn’t find XMRV in the blood of CFS patients.

The article is not an easy read. Who wants to hear about details from the lab? But if these scientific details make all the difference for the society to differentiate between a real threat from a new retrovirus or an unnecessary hype (in the best financial interest of certain private institutions), then people need to know these details – explained via good science journalism.

Also important: Corruption in the German Health Care System

An article (though, too short!) in the Süddeutsche Zeitung (Wiebke Rögener) highlights corruption structures in the German health care system. The fact alone is not the most interesting about this article (it is well known, that about 56 billion Euro get lost in European Union health care due to corruption, according to the European Healthcare Fraud & Corruption Network), but Rögener gives a variety of examples, how different (and therefore hard to track) physicians, pharmacies, hospitals, or pharma companies try to flimflam the system. I should mention the so called “post marketing surveillance studies” here: It is a good idea, to pay physicians to collect data about new, recently approved drugs – but if pharma companies spend much more money than they publish studies, anti-corruption organizations like Transparency International get suspicious, that the fees for the physicians are more like a bribe to convince the doctors to prefer a certain product.

Sascha Karberg

Mammoth, deep-frozen. Not yet freshly available.

Since Dolly, the cloned sheep, several scientists around the world announced the cloning of a whole zoo of mammals. Some had nothing more than a plan, some seemed to have proof (but had faked it), and some, actually, did make clones. In those peak days of the clone hype, even the plan to clone was good enough for a report. Does anyone remember the announcement of the cloning of the Giant Panda? Well, though the silly idea made headlines all over the world, the hidden fact was, that the “clone” (just a few clumsy cells, if ever in existence) died early – in the womb of a cat (Yes, a cat! Lacking pseudopregnant Pandas, the Chinese scientists tried cats as surrogate mothers for the “Panda-clone”, which was made by sticking a Panda cell nucleus into a rabbit’s oocyte. And this is not a joke!).

I really thought the days are over, where just the attempt to clone something was worth an article. However, it seems, that a Mammoth cloning project is just too tantalizing not to be put into headlines. “Japanese scientists attempt to resurrect Mammoth” shouted the news agency AFP (source: The online version of the Japanese newspaper “Yomiuri Shimbun”: Daily Yomiuri Online). The article lacks any hints about the major hurdles of such an experiment: that DNA degrades after death; that even minor breaks in the DNA would lead to non-functional genomes; that the scientists would need not only the usual 300 oocytes but hundreds or thousands more; that the harvesting of elephant oocytes is, well, difficult; that even artificial fertilization does not work for elephants etc. The report seems to ignore all the recent in-depth discussions about cloning techniques. And, by the way, not even the idea is new: Right after Dolly, the first loudmouth scientists raised the interest of credulous reporters with the mammoth clone ghost.

But the problem is, that people will take it for granted, if newspapers from Süddeutsche Zeitung (here) to RP online (here), stern (here) and Bild write, that Jurassic Park “could become a reality” and “they could have success”, “because” the scientists will use a technique from scientist Teruhiko Wakayama, who was at least able to clone mice frozen for 16 years. Well, 16 years and minimum 4000 years are quite a difference! Not to speak of the minor disparities of mice and elephants. The Standard adds a tiny bit of further information: The 2001 cloning of the nearly extinct “Gaur” bovine (Bos gaurus) was successful, though the clone died two days after birth. So, does this mean, that the chances for a mammoth clone are high? No, the article avoids to tell, that the gaur clone was created out of perfectly fresh cells! The last paragraph of the Handelsblatt‘s article, finally, raised some doubts, mentioning the (failed) mammoth clone attempt of a French team in 1999 and a critical comment of “Nature” regarding such experiments on the occasion of the announcement of the sequencing of the mammoth genome, recently.

What one could make out of a lousy agency news demonstrates the Ostthüringer Zeitung. This article includes the comments of a local scientist from Weimar, who questions the use of a cloned mammoth and insists to use the financial resources to protect the habitats of living elephant species.

In summary: Please leave me alone with cloned mammoth news. Wake me up, if someone actually cloned a mammoth, not a minute earlier.

Sascha Karberg

The campus of the Kaiser-Wilhelm-Society (now Max-Planck-Society) south of Berlin.

What is now renowned worldwide as the Max-Planck-Society was established on January 11th, 1911, exactly 100 years ago in Berlin. At first it was the “Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gesellschaft” (KWG). The today 80 institutions (with about 5000 scientists) make it one of the most successful scientific endeavors in Germany. The Berlin Tagesspiegel has the general story, explaining that it was quite an innovation. Its founder, too, was unusual politically: Adolf von Harnack (a theologist and director of the Royal Library), who set up this  basic research institution using (at least partly) private money. Harnack’s concept of science management  was to find a brilliant scientist and build an institute “around” him. Although inherently authoritarian and hierarchical it succeeded. The article does not spare the dark times of the Kaiser-Wilhelm-Society during the first world war, when its Haber Institute  was engaged in toxic gas research, or under the Nazi-regime, when the KWG did not resist expulsion of Jewish scientists.

However, the article lacks a deep assessment of the KWG’s and MPG’s past and, first and foremost, its current role in the German society. And that’s not a surprise, because the author is a scientist from the Max-Planck-Institute for Science History in Berlin. An independent journalist might have been a better choice and could have asked more uncomfortable questions, in my opinion. I mention this here, because Newspapers like the Tagesspiegel tend to allow more and more “guest authors” (well, they do write for free, you know). Sometimes it might be fine to get an inside view from an expert or the perspective of authors other than journalists. But this topic is one that may have been served much better by a journalist – and not what Germans call a “Hofberichterstatter”.

Also: Flatulence a disease?

The Austrian Standard published a story about flatulence, based on a survey from the food company Danone Activia (which, what a surprise, sells products with claims against flatulence). Nine out of ten Austrian women, according to the “study”, are said to know the feeling of a bloated stomach. The article explains early on, that flatulence is a normal condition and not a disease. But than, why is it worth to be printed, anyway? This is not a scientific study, but it will be read as such, if journalists frame it the same way as peer-reviewed studies. Of course, such a survey (and the accompanying press release) might serve as the starting point for a journalist story. But than the author should hint the reader, that last year Danone drew back an application to get approval from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) for a health claim for their yoghurt products Actimel and Activia? And that the British advertisement agency ASA stopped Actimel spots claiming a positive health effect of the yoghurt for kids.

We just shouldn’t make it too easy for companies to get their (unproven) messages out to the consumers.

Worth to mention: One against Big Pharma

Is it worth to spend hundreds of millions of tax money every year for influenza vaccines? The Neue Zürcher Zeitung published a profile of the British-Italian doctor Tom Jefferson from the Cochrane Collaboration, who try encourage evidence based decisions in medicine and health care. Jefferson, part of the Concrane’s Acute Respiratory Infections Group, claims, that the evidence for the widespread use of influenza vaccines and medications is weak. The article not only explains the reasons for Jefferson’s doubts regarding the “influenza pandemic” but also his personality.

Sascha Karberg

Money is great, especially if you have enough of it in your account, right? But as the  financial and economic crisis has made people realize, money also is the cause of many problems.

To be sure, Karl Marx and many others have thought deeply about the consequences of money as a medium of exchange for goods and services.

But it was Silvio Gesell (b.  1862), who realized that money should “rust”, so to speak. Gesell’s idea was that money hoarded on bank accounts and not used for actual exchange of goods and services should lose its value over time. This way, people would be eager to keep their money in circulation. A strange idea? Well, it has already been tested (successfully!).  Die Zeit printed an article by Wolfgang Uchatius about the surprising “historical experiment” of an Austrian mayor, Michael Unterguggenberger, a social democrat and former engine driver. In 1932, after the global economic crisis struck Austria, he introduced what Gesell called “free” or “depreciative money”. Unterguggenberger named the bills “work value certificates.” He used them to pay workers for building new streets or other infrastructure projects in his jurisdiction.They lost 10 percent of their value after a month. Of course people reinvested the rusting money quickly. And soon, while Austria struggled with the economic crisis, Unterguggenberger’s small town of Wörgl prospered.

The article tells the story brilliantly from the perspective of Unterguggenberger. How he, the self educated worker, learned about Gesell’s theory, how he acted to make it a reality, and how he failed, finally,  because issuing of money was legally restricted to the national bank. It’s inspiring to read, that such a (seemingly) minor change in the concept of money might solve (at least some of) the problems, economies all over the world are struggling with today. My only criticism is that readers should ream why no other society has tried to follow Unterguggenberger’s or Gesell’s lead. Or is it just because wealthy people and wealthy states would lose most if money could rust?

Sascha Karberg

For years (and especially during the recent swine or avian flu pandemic panic) Tamiflu (Roche) and Relenza (GSK) have been the drugs of choice to treat flu patients with severe complications like pneumonia. Governments all over the world bought and stored the drugs to be prepared. But, apparently, the data proving the efficacy of these drugs are weak! Nike Heinen (a freelance) quotes a report of the Cochrane Collaboration, a group of scientists “preparing, maintaining and promoting the accessibility of systematic reviews of the effects of health care”.

The article, published (in slightly different versions) by Süddeutsche Zeitung, Basler Zeitung (Tages-Anzeiger), and Badische Zeitung, explains in detail the astonishing career of these now Billion-Dollar-Blockbusters. However, in 2009, Heinen reports, the Cochrane scientists got hints that the important “Kaiser-review” might be flawed. A team lead by the virologist Laurent Kaiser from the University of Geneva had summarized 10 Tamiflu-studies (all done by Roche). In 2003, his conclusion was, that the drug has a beneficary effect compared to placebo. First, the Cochrane scientists trusted Kaisers conclusions. But after they were tipped off that five authors of the Kaiser-review were on Roche’s payroll and that not all the reviewed data came from peer reviewed journals, they asked Roche for the raw data. Roche denied the request, because the Cochrane scientists refused to sign a contract, that would bind them to maintain silence about any of their findings after review of the data. In December 2009, the scientists reported their objections at the British Medical Journal (BMJ) but  raw data from Roche is still not openly available.

The Cochrane collaboration is not only concerned about a possible lack of efficacy and billions of Dollars spent on drugs without a substantial effect compared to placebo pills. Some of the publicly available data about Tamiflu also report substantial side effects in at least ten cases, three of them connected with Tamiflu.

Regarding Relenza, the comparable flu drug from GlaxoSmithKline, the data do not seem to provide any better evidence. According to the Cochrane scientists, there are hints of data manipulation, too, and GSK’s major US study of Relenza did not show any efficacy – and never got published.

Sounds like a scoop, right? And it reads as such, first (“exclusive”, claims the Basler Zeitung). But unfortunately, the reader does not get a hint, that the article is not the first one picking up the criticism of the Cochrane scientists (have a look at Der Spiegel or the LA Times blog or Science’s news section etc.).

The New Scientist even included some criticism of the Cochrane allegations and some data to judge the re-evaluated efficacy estimations. Stuff, that I missed in the update article.

But don’t get me wrong, I liked the article, because it is still worth it to remind the public about the unsettled concerns with Tamiflu and Relenza. Especially, the nervous reaction of Roche hints that it would be worth it to dig even deeper…

Sascha Karberg

The Neue Zürcher Zeitung took a local path to deal with the conference on climate change in Cancun. Swiss and Austrian scientists found, that regular hares are infiltrating mountain hare (or arctic or snow hare) country. According to genetic studies, more  mountain hares carry gene variants from regular grey-brownish hares under their snow white fur. Climate change (bringing few less snow covered landscapes and warmer winters) seems to allow regular hares to move higher into the hills until the ranges of the closely- related species overlap. Five out of 113 tested snow hares already carry genes from their more common cousins. And the hares are not the only ones affected by the rising temperatures. The regular ouzel (German: “Amsel”) is now able to populate the higher regions of the alps, the habitat of the close relative, the ring ouzel (“Ringdrossel”),writes NZZ. But neither ring ouzel or mountain hare can move much higher, so that the rising temperatures cause an advantage for low land species but a disadvantage for specialized mountain species. The scientists are not sure, whether hybrid species will emerge now. So far, the biologists say, the snow white fur of the mountain hare has no dark spots.

Zeit online took the Pacific path and interviewed Netatua Pelesikoti, manager of the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP), about the consequences of climate change for the island states. The FAZ‘ correspondent from Cancun followed an expert from the insurance company Münchner Rück. And the FTD reports from Borneo and the destruction of rain forest there.

Sascha Karberg

Since excavation of its first known member in the German Neander valley the fate of Homo neanderthalensis has prodded people to think about the vulnerability of our own human species, Homo sapiens. And right in time for the discussions in Cancun about the threatening effects of recent climate change on current human populations, German scientists say it was climate that ended the time on Earth of perhaps the last and surely the best known surviving fellow member of our genus. At least, that’s the interpretation of old archaeological, anthropological and palaeogenetic data by a team of scientists from the Neandertal museum in Mettmann and the University of Cologne. Due to a period of extreme droughts (caused by a drop of temperature in the northern hemisphere) the hunter and gatherer communities of Homo neanderthalensis lost their livelihoods. The Neandertals has survived many previous climate fluctuations. About every  1000 years the temperature had also dropped, forcing the Neandertal people to move back and forth between the 53rd and 45th latitude in search of a suitable habitat. In the fourth (and especially dry) period of six such climate fluctuation events (so called Heinrich events), the area for refuge was too small to keep the species going and it died out.

The basis of this news, which was spread in Germany by the agency DPA, is a study published in the journal “Quaternary International”.

The piece from DPA (picked up, more or less intact, by the Tagesspiegel, Welt, Krone, RP-Online, e.g.) does not fully explain why Neandertals managed to survive three previous periods of colder climate. Perhaps the scientists couldn’t answer that either, but it looks like no one asked them or any other archaeologists outside of the Cologne group. How plausible is this theory? Did Homo sapiens populations suffer, too? What’s the evidence for this new theory? How new is it anyway?

I found only two individual pieces that tackle the question at all: one from the Austrian Standard, which starts with a quick introduction and provides a link to the original study article at Quarternary International; and another article from the Wiener Zeitung (Vienna), which actually included a second quote! Great? Well, not a live quote. From a US scientist, it is from an old Scientific American article which talks about retreat areas of Homo sapiens, NOT  H. neanderthalensis. And,  even better for those who like long shots, these retreat areas are located in South Africa – quite a walk from Europe.

Also: The sociology of lies

Wikileaks is top news right now. And not only for political journalists. There is a science journalism perspective, too, proves the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (Jürgen Kaube). “Every social relationship depends on some, perhaps a lot, but definitely not thorough knowledge of each other”, Kaube starts his article about the sociology of lies and honesty, diplomacy and transparency. He takes Wikileaks as a “nice example” of what happens when the rules of secrecy and frankness are disturbed. He talks about the roles people play in social relationships.  And about the “back rooms”, the guarded places where diplomats or regular people do not need to pretend or play act. And that’s where journalism comes in, according to Joshua Meyrowitz (University of New Hampshire): TV and other media destroy these back rooms. In the Sixties, wives learned about the work life of their husbands, kids heard about what parents did not want them to know, and the people got a better view of politicians, Kaube summarizes Meyrowitz thoughts. Now, Wikileaks opens the door to the back room of diplomacy. That’s the purpose of journalism, of course. But if anyone has to play roles in a society, asks Kaube, is then the existence of back rooms a social evil in itself?  “Diplomacy will never be earnest in the sense of Wikileaks”, the article says in closing.

Sascha Karberg

It was George Soulié de Morant, a Frenchman (1878-1955), who is considered to be the “father” of western style acupuncture practice. His descriptions in his books, how and where to put the needles into the skin of patients, guided all his followers. Unfortunately he was a fabulist, according to an article published in the Süddeutsche Zeitung (a short version of a text published in Deutsches Ärzteblatt). The author (Hanjo Lehmann) is a physician and head of the German Institute for Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), which aim it is to research the scientific basis of TCM. He seems to be the first ever, who really looked into the roots of the western style acupuncture and the ridiculous stories of Solié de Morant. The article explains Soulié de Morant’s fraud in detail, starting with his name – he himself added the aristocratic “de Morant”. Although he writes, that he spoke Chinese, when he arrived in China in 1901 (only 23 years old!), there is no hint, that he ever studied Chinese or lived with Chinese people. Also his rank as viceconsul and judge seems implausible, because he never visited any university or diplomatic school. Regarding acupuncture, Soulié de Morant describes, that he first saw and practiced the technique himself during a cholera outbreak in Bejing in 1901 – unfortunately, no records of such an outbreak at that time exist. These and dozens of more inconsistencies are interesting, but what consequences do they have for “modern” acupuncture therapies? Well, Soulié de Morant’s fiction and misconceptions not only found their way into but are the basis of current acupuncture protocols, the official course book of acupuncture of the German physician association “Bundesärztekammer”. Reading the article, it seems like the whole philosophy of western acupuncture, with energy streams and stuff like that, are based on sloppy translations, misconceptions or even blank fantasy. Only one example (because I won’t make the mistake to translate German acupuncture slang into English): The “Qi” in Chinese acupuncture tradition meant a fine substance – Soulié translated it into the disembodied, current-like “energy”. A whole different concept with consequences for the all-day therapy.

George Soulié de Morant

One might say, “Who cares? In most cases, acupuncture doesn’t work, anyway.” Well, to get an “official approve” to offer acupuncture, German physicians need to pay a substantial amount for a course, based on the course book of the Bundesärztekammer – which is in turn based on Soulié de Morant’s quackery. Not to speak of the patients, who get pinned with needles based on the fantasy of a fraud.

And: Until now, the positive effects of acupuncture, against migraine e.g., seem to be caused by a classical placebo effect. But have these studies been based on Soulié de Morant’s “misconceptions”? Isn’t it possible, that the wrong application of acupuncture misguided research, that tried to explain the effects of this type of TCM?

And, finally, since 2006 acupuncture is included in the catalogue of benefits of the German health insurance companies (at least for a few indications) – a therapy based on the doctrine of a fraud.

The article was published at Süddeutsche Zeitung a few days ago (together with a comment). I really thought, that this would spur some discussion and questioning of the Bundesärtzekammer, acupuncture societies etc., how they react to these new findings. But, apparently, I waited to no avail.

- Sascha Karberg

The gene variant has been named after the city, where it might have originated: Neu-Delhi-Metallo-Beta-Lactamase-1, NDM-1, makes bacteria resistant against all currently known antibiotics. NDM-1-bacteria have been originally found in India, Bangladesh and Pakistan, but already reached Europe, too. In Belgian, a man died, who came back with an injury from a visit in his home country Pakistan (according to the Belgian newspaper “Le Soir”), probably the first NDM-1-caused death in Europe. The German Robert-Koch-Institute said, that a few cases have been registered in Germany, too (that’s the information from dpa, the website of the Robert-Koch-Institute is more specific: 4 cases), although not fatal due to the existence and relative effectiveness of antibiotics like Tigecycline and Colistine (which failed in the Belgian case). The journal Lancet reports about an international study, which found 37 patients in the UK and 140 in Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan infected with NDM-1-positive bacteria.

Die Zeit took the chronological path, starting with Fleming’s discovery of Penicillin, the early, euphoric days of antibiotics, and the first waves of resistant bacteria. Then the article explains the recent events, mentioning the NDM-1-gene – and that bacteria with the gene have been found not only in Belgium, but in the UK, the US and Germany, too.

But the whole article does not mention, what kind of bacteria carry the dangerous NDM-1 gene so far (or what kind of diseases or symptoms the bacteria cause). Which is true for basically all articles published in the German language media (Stern, Süddeutsche, e.g.) – perhaps because they are more or less based on a piece distributed via dpa, the German press agency, which did not provide such an information. Nevertheless, the Robert-Koch-Institute knows it (as almost always in such cases) and explains it on its website (also here): So called Gram-negative bacteria, especially “Klebsiella pneumonia and other Enterobacteria”. (Bild, by the way, mentioned at least, “E.coli, e.g.”. )

What I also missed, was an explanation of any kind, how the NDM-1-gene actually works. I found this on, again, the RKI website: The gene codes for a Beta-Lactamase, an enzyme, which destroys antibiotics based on a Beta-Lactam-group – which is a long known weak point of these antibiotics and cause for bacterial resistance. Whereas other resistant bacteria were still sensitive for carbapenem, which is used as a reserve drug, when other antibiotics don’t work. The new gene NDM-1 makes an enzyme, which is able to destroy even carbapenem.

Of course, these are just “molecular details”. But they make clear, that we face a well known and neglected problem and not a sudden, unpredictable catastrophe. These are not “Superbacteria” (most of the headlines used this term), they are just a little bit more effective than all the other resistant bugs, who are already able to destroy Beta-Lactam-drugs. Nevertheless, this antibiotic resistance is a serious problem. But (science) journalists should mention the scientific background, to be able to hint the public (scientists, politicians, etc), that society and pharmaceutical industry needs to take more efforts to develop new antibiotics. Die Welt provided exactly this information: “Superbug displays pharma industry’s failure“. The article names the real problem behind the spectacular death in Belgium: The companies have no monetary incentives to spend (a lot of) money on a difficult search for new antibiotics, if the reimbursement for such a new antibiotic is small, because doctors are going to use it only for the rare patients with multiresistant bacterial infections.

More ink: Berliner Kurier, Standard, Wiener Zeitung, Tagesspiegel

A detail, worth noticing:

Everyone knows Neil Armstrong, of course. But what else do we know about him, the first man on the moon? Not much, and this is because Armstrong almost never spoke to the press after the space capsule of Apollo 11 landed back on earth. Generations of journalists tried to interview him and all got the famous standard letter: “Mr. Armstrong does not speak with journalists.” Never stop trying – that’s the lesson to learn from the editorial board of “Servus TV”, a (very) small Austrian TV station, which is owned by the founder of a successful soft drink company, Dietrich Mateschitz. Like thousands of other journalists before, the Servus TV editor sent his request, but he was clever enough to include the bait, that the interview would take place at the Technology Museum of the Salzburg airport, which has an impressing collection of historical airplanes – all owned by Dietrich Mateschitz. Armstrong came, saw (the planes), and spoke. (With Frank Schirrmacher, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, see youtube).

All the journalists, who tried but were not as lucky as Servus TV, might take some comfort from this article at Süddeutsche Zeitung – about the biological role of consolation.

Sascha Karberg

Should society allow a certain degree of whaling? This is a question not only of scientific, but also political, cultural, and – perhaps – economical considerations – not to speak of emotions and political populism. Nevertheless, it is mostly discussed by science/environmental reporters, which is a good thing, if the journalists tend to stick to the facts. Hans Schuh (Die Zeit) wrote down his thoughts about the outcome of the negotiations at the International Whaling Commission (IWC) today. He describes the standoff situation at the commission, where pro- and contra-hunting nations paralyze any political advancements (Headline: “Deep in the religious war”). Which is, from a rational standpoint, not a good thing, because this way, some nations (Norway, Japan, Iceland) just ignore the prohibition of whale hunting and more whales loose their lives than a new agreement would have allowed. The proposal to allow a certain degree of hunting is not automatically a breach of the whaling ban. Schuh writes very carefully about how bad it is not only for the whales but for a democratic institution like the IWC, if opposing fractions unconciliatory insist on their position and do not even seek for a consensus. He asks the question, whether the “quarrelsome talking-shop” (the IWC) is still able to find a compromise, anyway, and whether it wouldn’t be a good idea to just close it. The Neue Zürcher Zeitung follows the same thinking: “Whaling debate in a dead-end“, also the article from Michael Miersch (Welt): “The Angels of the Oceans“.

Regarding the outcome of the IWC (NO resolution), some articles start with a not quite right headline, like “Commission stops whale hunters” (Spiegel online) - as if the commission had actively done something.

(Short parenthesis: Of course I know, that the authors are not always responsible for the headlines. But someone at the particular newspaper or journal or website IS. So keep the Tracker’s remarks as what they are: Never a personal critique but hopefully sometimes a starting point for thinking about or discussing quality standards – either between author and editor or within a whole editorial board.)

Others chose more apropriate headlines: “Whaling keeps prohibited” (Standard.de), or “Whaling ban persists” (Rheinische Post online), “Whale hunting still prohibited” (Süddeutsche). Also: Stern.de

Bummer, that only a few articles (Süddeutsche, e.g.) mentioned briefly the criticism of US-scientists, that the  science committee of the IWC and scientific data “lost influence”. Perhaps its more time later to dig deeper and try to find out, what data are not taken into account? To get back to facts and raise the possibility of a compromise in favor of the whales…

Sascha Karberg