【推荐1】Rates of anti-dining syndrome in newborns surged in recent years, but a newer approach to caring for newborn babies exposed to drugs during pregnancy gets them out of the hospital sooner and with less medication. Newborns in drug withdrawal may experience upset stomach, miserable crying and extreme discomfort. Researchers looked at the impacts of the ESC (Eat, Sleep, Console care) approach on 1,300 infants at 26 US hospitals, and compared them with the current standard for caring for infants exposed to drugs.

ESC encourages involvement from parents, and prioritizes care that doesn’t involve medication, breastfeeding, for example. The usual approach involves a nurse measuring a baby’s withdrawal symptoms before providing treatment.

Compared to usual care, use of the ESC approach substantially decreased time until those infants were medically ready for discharge, without increasing specified harmful outcomes.

The infants assessed with the ESC method were discharged after eight days on average, compared with almost 15 days for the infants who were cared for by the standard approach. Additionally, infants in the ESC care group were 63% less likely to receive drug medication — 19.5% received medication compared with 52% in the group receiving usual care.

The current approach to usual care is a very comprehensive and nurse-led way of assessing the infant, whereas the ESC approach involves the mom in the way that you assess the infant, and allows the mom to try her best to comfort the infants and see if the infant is able to be consoled or is able to eat or is able to sleep.

“So, in that way, it’s a little bit more functional, like looking at the abilities of the infants versus how severely the infant is affected. Assessment results determine whether a baby should receive medication to control withdrawal symptoms,’’ said Baker, the director of the NIH HEAL Initiative, which provides funds to researchers studying ways to relieve the country’s drug health crisis.

【推荐2】Imagine a simple blood test that could flag most kinds of cancers at the earliest, most curable stage. Liquid biopsies could, in theory, detect a tumor (肿瘤) well before it could be found by touch, symptoms or imaging. Blood tests could avoid the need for surgeons to cut tissue samples and make it possible to reveal cancer hiding in places needles and scalpels cannot safely reach. They could also determine what type of cancer is taking root to help doctors decide what treatment might work best to destroy it.

Liquid biopsies are not yet in hand, because it is hard to find definitive cancer signals in a tube of blood, but progress in recent years has been impressive. Last year the journal Science published the first big prospective study of a liquid biopsy for DNA and proteins from multiple types of cancers. Though far from perfect, the blood test called CancerSEEK found 26 tumors that had not been discovered with conventional screenings.

Liquid biopsies can rely on a variety of biomarkers in addition to tumor DNA and proteins, such as free-floating cancer cells themselves. But what makes the search difficult, Ana Robles, a cancer biologist of the National Cancer Institute, explains, is that “if you have an early-stage cancer or certain types of cancer, there might not be a lot of tumor DNA,” and tests might miss it. The ideal blood test will be both very specific and very sensitive so that even tiny tumors can be found. To tackle this challenge, CancerSEEK looks for cancer-specific mutations (突变) on 16 genes, and for eight proteins that are linked to cancer and for which there are highly sensitive tests.

Simple detection is not the only goal. An ideal liquid biopsy will also determine the likely location of the cancer so that it can be treated. “Mutations are often shared among different kinds of cancer, so if you find them in blood, you don’t know if that mutation is coming from a stomach cancer or lung cancer,” says Anirban Maitra, a cancer scientist at the Anderson Cancer Center. To solve that problem, some newer liquid biopsies look for changes in gene expression. Such changes, Maitra notes, are “more organ-specific”.

On the nearer horizon are liquid biopsies to help people already diagnosed with cancer. Last year the government approved the first two such tests, which scan for tumor DNA so doctors can select mutation-targeted drugs. Scientists are working on blood tests to detect the first signs of cancer recurrence (复发) in patients who have completed treatment. This work is moving fast, but does it save lives?

That is the question companies such as Thrive and Grail must answer for their broadly ambitious screening tests. “These companies have to prove that they can detect early cancer and, more important, that the early detection can have an impact on cancer survival,” Maitra observes.

【推荐3】People in Australia have been really cautious about using natural or alternative treatments compared to other places, according to Dr. Paul Laver, a professor at the University of Sydney. He thinks this is because doctors in Australia have always been very powerful, and they are unwilling to let others take their place. In many other countries, regular treatments and these alternative treatments have worked closely together for a long time. For example, in Germany, medicines made from plants account for 10%of the country’s medicine sales. In the United States, more people visited these alternative therapists (治疗专家) than regular doctors in 1990.

During the past 20 years, more people in Australia have started to like these alternative treatments. In a 1983 national health survey, 1.9% of people say they had contacted alternative therapists like chiropractors or herbalists. By 1990, this figure had risen to 2.6% of the population. Rather than criticizing this trend, increasing numbers of doctors in Australia, especially the younger ones, are starting to work with alternative therapists or take courses themselves, particularly in acupuncture and herbalism. Part of the motivation was financial, Dr Laver said. The bottom line is that most doctors don’t want to lose patients. If they see potential patients going elsewhere, they might want to be able to offer a similar service.

In 1993, Dr. Laver did a survey in Sydney and found that people who went to alternative health therapists were usually those who hadn’t been helped much by regular medicine. These people liked the holistic approach of their alternative therapists, and the friendly, concerned and detailed attention they had received, which they didn’t always get from regular doctors.

The survey suggested that people visited alternative therapists for various problems like muscle pains, stomach issues, and emotional stress etc. It suggested that calling it “complementary medicine” might be better because people use it alongside regular medicine, d especially when regular medicine doesn’t seem to help.

【推荐1】Billionaire Sir Christopher Hohn expects the greatest “demand disruption (中断)” for oil since the 1970s shock to cause an increase in renewable energy investment.

He said high oil prices are “a positive thing” for the climate as the energy crisis results in a “dramatic speed-up” in decarbonisation (碳减排). “The whole world should now be focused on seeking alternatives, whether they’re renewables or hydrogen fuels. All of these things are far more economic.”

He pointed to the recent boost of EU (欧盟) for renewable energy funding, as part of a plan to reduce imports of gas. Even as oil and gas companies obtain record profits from the high prices at present, Hohn said climate-focused investors will ultimately benefit from the energy price shock.

“The oil price increase leads to plans for accelerated decarbonisation,” said Hohn. “I personally believe that we’ll have demand disruption as we had in the 70s, and that there will be a dramatic acceleration in decarbonisation. I actually view it as a positive thing.”

Hohn has pressured companies to give shareholders a vote on their climate plans. Spanish airport operator Aena and aircraft manufacturer Airbus improved their emissions (排放) tar-gets as a result. Hohn has also pushed for stricter regulation on corporate climate promises. “Corporate decarbonisation isn’t going to happen through voluntary methods,” Hohn said.

Hohn is also backing a new rating agency that will grade company emissions strategies, through his charity, the Children’s Investment Fund Foundation. The Climate Action-plan Rating Centre (Climate-Arc) will analyse public company data and publish climate plan ratings.

Investors often struggle to analyse corporate climate plans. “Because though some organizations declare their commitment to environmental protection, they actually do the opposite,” Hohn said, “I expect a large proportion of companies will get graded F if they’re not doing enough. Even companies with net zero emissions targets have failed to set out plans about how to reach those goals. The impact is going to be a bit like, ‘the emperor has no clothes’.”

【推荐1】At a conference last week, I received an interesting piece of advice: “Assume we are wrong.” When Nosek recommended that I and other scientists assume that we were wrong, he was sharing a strategy that he’s employed in his own lab—a strategy for changing the way we respond to criticism.

Assuming that we are wrong is not so foreign to science. Many of our past scientific theories have been wrong, so surely many of our current theories will turn out to be wrong, too. That doesn’t mean we haven’t made progress, but it does suggest that there is always room for improvement.

One worry about this approach is that it could discourage scientists, because trying to be less wrong might be a less effective encouragement than the promise of being right. Another concern is that a strategy that works well with scientists might not work when it comes to communicating science with the public.

Despite these worries, I still like Nosek’s suggestion because it builds in humility (谦卑) (“There are things I do not know!”) along with a sense that we can do better (“There are things I do not know yet!”). It also builds in a sense of community—we’re all in the same boat when it comes to falling short of getting things right. Perhaps the focus on a shared goal—our goal as scientists and humans of being less wrong—can help make up for the harms in scientific motivation or communication.

I also like Nosek’s advice because it isn’t limited to science. Trying to be less wrong—rather than more right—could be a beneficial way to communicate our aims across a variety of contexts, whether it’s a daily argument or a business decision. I may be wrong about who did the dishes last night, or about what is the best investment; if I begin from the assumption that I can be wrong and I’m trying to be less wrong, any challenge may not appear so threatening.