Scientists Investigating Small Orange Objects Coating Surface of the Moon
Over half a century ago, Apollo astronauts encountered something surprising littering the desolate lunar surface: a vast number of tiny orange beads.
As Universe Today reports, scientists have long proposed that these beads, each smaller than a grain of sand, date back to over three billion years ago, when volcanic eruptions on the now-inert natural satellite were still commonplace.
The theory goes that material launched up by lunar volcanoes would solidify into tiny drops in the freezing vacuum of space, surviving without any erosion or weather for billions of years.
Decades later, researchers have now used high-tech microscopic techniques to get a much more detailed look at these tiny orange beads.
Using electron microscopy, X-ray spectroscopy, and a host of other techniques, the team found that each glass bead tells a different story, fleshing out a geologically active history rife with violent volcano explosions.
"We've had these samples for 50 years, but we now have the technology to fully understand them," said Ryan Ogliore, Washington University professor of physics and coauthor of a paper set to be published in the journal Icarus, in a press release. "Many of these instruments would have been unimaginable when the beads were first collected."
Ogliore also found that some of the beads are reminiscent of natural processes that take place on Earth.
"The very existence of these beads tells us the Moon had explosive eruptions, something like the fire fountains you can see in Hawaii today," Ogliore said.
However, their shape, color, and chemical composition are unsurprisingly completely different thanks to their extraterrestrial origin.
The team had to go to great lengths to make these measurements. Since the tiny Apollo samples can easily react with oxygen and other elements in Earth's atmosphere, the researchers had to protect them from air exposure at every step.
But thanks to their detailed analysis, the history of our planet's satellite is slowly coming into focus.
The research tells a complex story of the Moon's evolution, "like reading the journal of an ancient lunar volcanologist," according to Ogliore.
More on the Moon: Scientists Say There's Over a Trillion Dollars of Platinum Waiting to Be Extracted From the Moon's Craters
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
an hour ago
- Medscape
Epigenetic Clocks: New Types, New Promises, New Skepticism
Will birthdays go the way of the Betamax and Blackberry? Our culture is always eager to move away from old things toward new things and these days if you want to know how old you are, the number of candles on your cake is just one clue — and maybe not even the best clue. Epigenetic clocks measure what's happening inside you on a cellular level and they might say you're aging faster (or slower) than you thought based on changes to your DNA. First developed in 2013 as research tools, epigenetic clocks are now widely accessible through direct-to-consumer test kits. Send in a sample of your DNA and receive your results — your 'biological age' — within weeks. Can this give the average layperson valuable insights? Should doctors be using them to help predict how one patient might get sick or how long another might live? Yes, no, and maybe are all legit answers here depending on who's asking and who's being asked. Right now, epigenetic clocks are in the same spot as other highly hyped medical tech — like artificial intelligence, like wearables, like implantables — in that they're not really 'there' yet and yet everyone wants them to be. Researchers already use them, of course. They have extensive clinical potential and simultaneously excite health-conscious consumers: How quickly can I know how old I really am? The tests have evolved quickly and will continue to do so. For example: Some tests require you to draw a little blood or spit in a tube, but one of the latest tests uses an at-home cheek swab instead. In a study published in Frontiers in Aging , US company Tally Health showed its CheekAge epigenetic clock can predict the risk for early death. For every SD increase in CheekAge score, study participants faced a 21% higher risk for death before their next check-in with researchers, which was scheduled every 3 years. 'We believe that epigenetic aging clocks currently can serve as useful indicators of health and lifestyle, which is often missing from the care conversation, and should be part of routine preventative care,' said Max Shokhirev, PhD, head of Computational Biology and Data Science at Tally Health. Epigenetic clocks can also help researchers compare populations over time, track users in specific contexts, or stratify clinical trial participants into high-risk or low-risk groups, Shokhirev said. However, some experts say there is plenty of room for improvement as the science behind epigenetic clocks advances. Although companies tout the accuracy of their clocks, results can vary by years or decades, leaving test takers confused. Sometimes the test results come with suggestions for boosting longevity, including products the testing companies want to sell you. Then there's the biggest question: If you can improve your score, will you truly live better or longer? How to Build a Clock Instead of tracking time, epigenetic clocks detect patterns in DNA methylation, a chemical reaction that attaches molecules called methyl groups to DNA. All your cells have the same DNA, and methylation determines which genes get turned on and off, said Eric Verdin, MD, president and chief executive officer of the Buck Institute for Research on Aging. For example, the gene for hemoglobin is turned on in red blood cells through methylation. The same gene is switched off in other cells, such as neurons. 'As we age, the precision of this epigenetic mechanism gets a little loose,' said Verdin. Cells lose some specificity, and genes turn on and off in the wrong places, a phenomenon known as epigenetic drift. 'Now we can measure this epigenetic drift during aging, and that's what the clocks are based on,' said Verdin. Methylation happens in about 28 million spots, known as methylation sites, in our genomes. To make the first epigenetic clocks, the Hannum and Horvath clocks, researchers analyzed blood samples from hundreds to thousands of people. They examined DNA methylation in a small fraction of methylation sites. They used the data to build a mathematical model that predicts age based on DNA methylation. The math behind the first clocks revolved around age. Today, scientists use second-generation epigenetic clocks such as PhenoAge and GrimAge, which also incorporate health-related variables, such as white blood cell counts and smoking history. One clock, DunedinPACE, reveals a rate of aging rather than a set number. Second-generation clocks likely have more predictive value for your health than earlier versions, said Verdin. Research suggests epigenetic age can foretell some health outcomes, such as working memory or surviving a stay at the intensive care unit, better than chronological age, the number you celebrate on your birthday. However, more research is needed to see how epigenetic clocks stack up to more established tests and screening tools. In one new study in the Journal of the American Heart Association , PhenoAge and GrimAge were not as good at predicting cardiovascular disease as the widely used Framingham Risk Score. Marketing to consumers is the most predictable advance in the tech. The cost for a single test runs between $250 and $500. Some companies also offer monthly subscriptions including repeat testing and recommended supplements. Insurance companies don't cover these tests for healthy people. Some insurers, like Aetna, will cover epigenetic tests when someone has symptoms of a specific disease and knowing the results could affect treatment. But these tests are different from epigenetic clocks — they detect specific epigenetic disease signatures instead of the markers that give an overall picture of health. (And it's difficult to get coverage for these, too: In one study in Genetics in Medicine , insurers covered just 11% of methylation-based genetic tests ordered by physicians for people with a diagnosis suspected to have a genetic component.) Clocking Test Results Some longevity testing companies use one or more second-generation clocks to estimate age. Some use their own proprietary clocks. So let's say you take a test: How much stock should you put in your results? As Verdin said, 'I've done all of my clocks, and my age varies from 40 to 67, all DNA methylation, which is, in my opinion, an indication that these tools are not ready for prime time.' (Note: As of publication time, Verdin is 68 years old.) Results vary because each clock has its own math, based on a unique combination of methylation sites and study participants. The numbers on your reports might not be useful in isolation, said Verdin. Instead, think of them as variables you can track over time. 'Where they have more value is if you use always the same clock, and you introduce a number of interventions,' said Verdin. 'For example, you start intermittent fasting, or you start metformin, or you do this intervention or that intervention, and if you see your clock moving in the right direction, that will be a good sign.' If you try this method, time follow-up tests carefully. DNA methylation isn't as static as people assume, said Verdin. Like measuring cortisol or blood sugar, it varies by time of day, skewing clock results by up to 5 years. 'You should always do them at exactly the same time, and hopefully, do it the same kind of day,' he said. 'You don't want to do one on a Sunday, when you're well rested, you're not stressed versus the Tuesday or Friday morning when you're super stressed.' Timing isn't the only problem that can affect your results and how to interpret them. 'Emerging research shows that there are race and ethnic disparities in terms of how the clock performs,' said Andres Cardenes, PhD, an assistant professor of epidemiology and population health at Stanford University, Stanford, California. Blame a lack of diversity in the data used to develop many epigenetic clocks. Most samples came from White people in the western part of the world. Cardenes' team is collecting more DNA methylation samples from underrepresented groups so future clocks can be applicable to all. The Lure of Slow Aging and Cheating Death An interesting way to think about this: Getting old is very new to the human experience. And some humans handle it better than others. An epigenetic clock can signal how well you are aging. But no one has figured out how to cheat death forever, so the question remains: How much can you realistically increase your life expectancy? A new study in Nature Aging shows that improvements in human life expectancy have slowed since 1990. Study author S. Jay Olshansky, PhD, professor of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of Illinois, Chicago, said this isn't bad news — it reflects how dramatically we improved survival during the 20th century through developments like antibiotics and refrigeration. 'This slowdown in the rate of increase is a product of us doing our job exceedingly well in medicine and public health and enabling people to live long enough to experience aging,' he said. Olshansky's team said it's unlikely that more than 15% of women and 5% of men will live to 100 unless we find a way to slow down biologic aging drastically. 'The problem is that when you succeed so well as humanity has, you expose the population to the underlying biological process of aging when they get to older ages, which is currently an immutable process,' he said. That's not for lack of effort. Many scientists are searching for ways to reverse aging. Epigenetic clocks might help people measure the effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving health and extending life, said Olshansky. But pay attention to what else testing companies are selling, like dietary supplements, he said. 'As long as they're not accompanied by embellished claims that you can somehow reverse your biological aging, or slow your biological aging, or live longer and healthier as a result of whatever it is that they're selling, then I think they're okay,' said Olshansky. 'I think they can actually provide some useful and valuable information.' The results might simply push you to do things that have already been shown to help people live healthier and longer, such as eating well and exercising. 'What we need to understand is that these biomarkers are becoming attractive because they track with general things that we know are helpful and healthy as well,' said Cardenes. 'For example, a diet rich in fruits and vegetables, particularly vegetables, has been shown to decelerate some of these clocks.' Research in Aging Cell also suggests that exercise slows down aging as measured by epigenetic clocks. On the Clock: What Does the Future Hold? The science behind epigenetic clocks is evolving fast. Researchers are working to make them more accurate and useful. For example, using epigenetic clocks, Verdin's team noticed that SARS-CoV-2 infections increased people's biologic ages by about 15 years. Postinfection, people had influxes of memory T cells that mirrored age-related changes in immune function. Verdin's team then made a clock that excluded methylation sites sensitive to these changes. It's now available through TruDiagnostic. More opportunity lies in the millions of DNA methylation sites yet to be tapped, said Verdin. Today's epigenetic clocks only probe hundreds to thousands of them. 'There's going to be even more interesting data coming in the future,' he said. Also new will be what and how clocks measure. A study in Aging late last year showed strong results of cell-specific clocks analyzing brain cells for Alzheimer's and liver cells for liver disease. Meanwhile, a new blood-based clock measures 'intrinsic capacity,' the sum of mobility, cognition, mental health, vision, hearing, and nutrition/vitality. All aimed at improving function in aging patients (and perhaps addressing health span and lifespan simultaneously). Researchers have also developed phenotypic clocks that examine biomarkers like blood pressure and cholesterol. The organ-specific clocks look to be most useful in detecting early deterioration by body part. 'Your longevity is determined by your frailty point,' said Verdin. 'In your case, it might be your heart, and some other person, it might be their liver. The first organ that's going to fail is going to determine your longevity.' Cardenes and others are also exploring how environmental factors affect clocks. 'We want to understand the very early marks that either chemical or social environments might leave in our genome,' he said. Will epigenetic clocks make their way into routine clinical practice? Probably, proponents say, but in what form? 'In the future, patients might be prescribed a low-cost biological age test for their doctors to know the rate of biological aging and detect any organs that need particular attention, years before the patient develops a disease of aging,' said David Sinclair, PhD, professor in the Department of Genetics at Harvard Medical School, Boston, co-founder of Tally Health, and chairman of the Scientific Advisory Board at InsideTracker. 'The test could also be used one day to confirm lifestyle and health factors such as smoking history and alcohol intake.' Verdin sees potential in pairing epigenetic clocks with other new clocks based on blood proteins and metabolites. 'My argument is that for these clocks, as clinical tools, to become important or more relevant, you have to use several,' said Verdin. 'I would not rely only on epigenetic. I would use proteomics, metabolomics, and hopefully get to a picture that is sort of a comprehensive picture.' More research is still needed to determine the value of epigenetic clocks, said Cardenes. 'What does it mean for people to get this test?' he said. 'Is it changing outcomes? At the end of the day, are people going to do things that will improve their health and longevity? It's still unclear whether this is helpful or not.'
Fast Company
an hour ago
- Fast Company
Workplace mistreatment may affect observers as strongly as victims
Picture this: On your way out of the office, you notice a manager berating an employee. You assume the worker made some sort of mistake, but the manager's behavior seems unprofessional. Later, as you're preparing dinner, is the scene still weighing on you—or is it out of sight, out of mind? If you think you'd still be bothered, you're not alone. It turns out that simply observing mistreatment at work can have a surprisingly strong impact on people, even for those not directly involved. That's according to new research led by Edwyna Hill, coauthored by Rachel Burgess, Manuela Priesemuth, Jefferson McClain, and me, published in the Journal of Applied Psychology. Using a method called meta-analysis —which takes results from many different studies and combines them to produce an overall set of findings—we reviewed the growing body of research on what management professors like me call 'third-party perceptions of mistreatment.' In this context, 'third parties' are people who observe mistreatment between a perpetrator and the victim, who are the first and second parties. We looked at 158 studies published in 105 journal articles involving thousands of participants. Those studies explored a number of different forms of workplace mistreatment ranging from incivility to abusive supervision and sexual harassment. Some of those studies took part in actual workplaces, while others examined mistreatment in tightly controlled laboratory settings. The results were striking: We found that observing a coworker being mistreated on the job has significant effects on the observers' emotions. In fact, we found that observers of mistreatment may be as affected by what happened as the people actually involved in the event. These reactions fall along a spectrum—some helpful, others less so. On the encouraging side, we found that observers tend to judge perpetrators and feel empathy for victims. These reactions discourage mistreatment by creating a climate that favors the victim. On the other hand, we found that observers may also enjoy seeing their coworkers suffer—an emotion called schadenfreude —or blame the victim. These sorts of reactions damage team dynamics and discourage people from reporting mistreatment. Why it matters These findings matter because mistreatment in the workplace is disturbingly common, and even more frequently observed than experienced. One recent study found that 34% of employees have experienced workplace mistreatment firsthand, but 44% have observed it happening to someone else. In other words, nearly half of workers have likely seen a scenario like the one described at the start of this article. Unfortunately, the human resources playbook on workplace mistreatment rarely takes third parties into account. Some investigation occurs, potentially resulting in some punishment for the perpetrator and some support for the victim. A more effective response to workplace mistreatment would recognize that the harm often extends beyond the victim, and that observers may need support too. What still isn't known What's needed now is a better understanding of the nuances involved in observing mistreatment. Why do some observers react with empathy, while others derive pleasure from the suffering of others? And why might observers feel empathy for the victim but still respond by judging or blaming them? Answering these questions is a crucial next step for researchers and leaders seeking to design more effective workplace policies.
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Bill Gates reveals 'next phase of Alzheimer's fight' as he shares dad's personal battle
Bill Gates is speaking out about his personal experience with Alzheimer's — and his hope for progress in fighting the disease. In an essay published this week on his blog at the Microsoft co-founder and tech billionaire, 69, reflected on the difficulty of spending another Father's Day without his dad, Bill Gates Sr. The elder Gates passed away in 2020 at the age of 94 after battling Alzheimer's. "It was a brutal experience, watching my brilliant, loving father go downhill and disappear," Gates wrote in the blog post. Today, motivated by his own experience with the common dementia, Gates — who serves as chair of the Gates Foundation — is committed to working toward a cure for the common dementia, which currently affects more than seven million Americans, or one in nine people over 65. In his blog, Gates expressed optimism about the "massive progress" being made in the fight against Alzheimer's and other dementias. Last year, Gates said he visited Indiana University's School of Medicine in Indianapolis to tour the labs where teams have been researching Alzheimer's biomarkers. "I also got the opportunity to look under the hood of new automated machines that will soon be running diagnostics around the world," he wrote. "It's an exciting time in a challenging space." One of the biggest breakthroughs in Alzheimer's research, according to Gates, is blood-based diagnostic tests, which detect the ratio of amyloid plaques in the brain. (Amyloid plaques, clumps of protein that accumulate in the brain, are one of the hallmarks of Alzheimer's.) "I'm optimistic that these tests will be a game-changer," Gates wrote. Last month, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the first blood-based test for patients 55 years and older, as Fox News Digital reported at the time. "A simple, accurate and easy-to-run blood test might one day make routine screening possible." Traditionally, Gates noted, the primary path to Alzheimer's diagnosis was either a PET scan (medical imaging) or spinal tap (lumbar puncture), which were usually only performed when symptoms emerged. The hope is that blood-based tests could do a better job of catching the disease early, decline begins. "We now know that the disease begins 15 to 20 years before you start to see any signs," Gates wrote. "A simple, accurate and easy-to-run blood test might one day make routine screening possible, identifying patients long before they experience cognitive decline," he stated. Gates said he is often asked, "What is the point of getting diagnosed if I can't do anything about it?" To that end, he expressed his optimism for the future of Alzheimer's treatments, noting that two drugs — Lecanemab (Leqembi) and Donanemab (Kisunla) — have gained FDA approval. "Both have proven to modestly slow down the progression of the disease, but what I'm really excited about is their potential when paired with an early diagnostic," Gates noted. He said he is also hopeful that the blood tests will help speed up the process of enrolling patients in clinical trials for new Alzheimer's drugs. To accomplish this, Gates is calling for increased funding for research, which often comes from federal grants. "This is the moment to spend more money on research, not less," he wrote, also stating that "the quest to stop Alzheimer's has never had more momentum." "There is still a huge amount of work to be done — like deepening our understanding of the disease's pathology and developing even better diagnostics," Gates went on. "I am blown away by how much we have learned about Alzheimer's over the last couple of years." Gates pointed out that when his father had Alzheimer's, it was considered a "death sentence," but that is starting to change. "I am blown away by how much we have learned about Alzheimer's over the last couple of years," he wrote. For more Health articles, visit "I cannot help but be filled with a sense of hope when I think of all the progress being made on Alzheimer's, even with so many challenges happening around the world. We are closer than ever before to a world where no one has to watch someone they love suffer from this awful disease."
