Science and democracy?

     The physicist Carl Sagan, in the second chapter of his book "The Demon-Haunted World" (1995), draws a parallel between science and democracy, saying that both have values ​​that are often indistinguishable, and two are the reasons given by him to corroborate that assertion. The first is that "science gives power to anyone who takes the trouble to learn it (although many have been systematically prevented from acquiring this knowledge). The second is that it feeds actually need, the free exchange of ideas; their values ​​are opposed to secrecy. " 

     I fully agree with the first of the reasons presented above, however, the second did not convince me. I may be very wrong, because I was introduced to academia very recently, but I have the impression that, once the status of a researcher is given here in Brazil by the number of publications and citations (among other factors) many scientists do not share your ideas for fear of losing a publication to other colleagues. The result are works that give the feeling of incompleteness, but that if they were made in collaboration with other authors in related areas, could produce much better quality jobs and more effective applications. 

     In this sense, thinking about work related to environmental issues, it seems highly profitable that, increasingly, are developed by a group of professionals specialized in different areas of knowledge. Then, as the science communication, I find it very accessible to anyone who can look with the wide availability of online bibliographies and congresses that allow the exchange of ideas between researchers. The technologies for exchanges abound, even though in many cases they do not work in practice. Goodwill? It Will Be? 

     Another thing that bothers me in the development of science in Brazil is the high incentive for the publication of new things and against the low investment for many of them get off the ground. There are technologies produced in the country for energy produced from movement of the waves and hydrogen-powered vehicles, just to name two examples (there are many others), but we do not see any of them being implemented in our cities, knowing how advantageous would be the environmental point of view. Why is that? Political issues. There is no investment by the government, probably because it is economically disadvantageous. 

     It is this reflection to you readers. As for the book mentioned in the first paragraph, is the tip of your reading. Despite the unusual title, this is an excellent book, which deals with the distinction between science and pseudoscience, how much of the population takes the latter by the former and how it can be harmful to those who do. It is available free at: www.filosofia.art.br/download/filosofia/carl_sagan_o_mundo_assombrado_pelos_demonios.pdf.

Sarah Norberto

Because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold #forpeaceinIsrael

Lately the news turned their attention to the Gaza Strip and its constant conflicts, with consequent deaths and devastation. Seniors, adults, youth, children and even babies Palestinians live days of terror seeking to survive, because in 18 days 844 people died, mostly civilians, reports Reuters. Many of them were beaten to death by injuries.

However, for those who survive, the consequences remain after the attacks. Within this perspective, the focus of this paper is to reflect on the climate of the city and brought the consequences to the health of survivors since the smoke left by the missile as well as contributing to the greenhouse effect, cause damage to health. Smoke is a mixture of solid particles and gases formed from the decomposition of some combustible material. The chemical composition of the smoke depends on the burning material but always contains carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide, among other generally toxic substances. Among the effects of smoke on people are decreased visibility, tearing and eye irritation, rapid breathing and heartbeat, intoxication and choking, vomiting, coughing and death. Continued inhalation of small amounts of smoke, as in smokers, for example, leads to chronic inflammation and lung malfunction, dilation and destruction of these alveoli. The mass inhalation, in turn, can cause immediate damage and serious even lethal to the respiratory tract. Even days after the inhalation people can develop serious respiratory diseases and symptoms (breathlessness, wheezing, fever, dizziness or nausea, bronchitis, chemical pneumonitis) or stay with permanent sequel. As the smoke is usually heated (sometimes at very high temperatures), the combination of the heat from the smoke cause even greater damage to the respiratory system. In damaged alveoli, gas exchange that normally occur (oxygen uptake, carbon dioxide elimination) cannot happen, partly or wholly. Without oxygen, tissues die within 5 to 7 minutes and the nervous tissue even faster.

This is the daily life of the people living in that region! How would Marcelo Rezende, "So I ask you ..." What are your reasons to complain about the country you live in? Politics, lack of water, poor income distribution, mismanagement of public funds, hospitals, violence. All issues are indeed very relevant, however, there is a country that cries out for help, for 12 hours of peace that is. People who have lost family, friends, acquaintances and constantly live under threat and cannot escape because the planes do not circulate region. These people that while survivors of the attacks, waging a daily battle with the organism itself to be able to breathe!

Each person has their beliefs, their individuality, this is known. And I also have mine, but my intention in quoting biblical passages is not propagate or much less impose my religion or beliefs to anyone, but lead us to one reflection on the universal right to life and love that we all have, no matter what we believe. As seen in Matthew 24:12 - And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.

Will we ever be able to detach us from self-centeredness and undertake an improvement of the world that poetically call "Worldism". It is obvious that most of us cannot go to Israel to do something, so I invite you to a prayer, pray, prayer, positive thinking, or whatever the meaning to ask you for peace on a desolate country.

Larissa Jurado

Traduction Sarah Norberto

Image: https://www.google.com.br/search?q=faixa+de+gaza&espv=2&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=9lXuU7DhHLXLsATT8ICgAw&sqi=2&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&biw=1600&bih=809#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=fdr-769fYr1P1M%253A%3BT-TIHtPndowjkM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fimagens.dm.com.br%252Fmidia%252FS5GLS_53cf292988ddbdaf0358cc38e8bfd1aa.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.dm.com.br%252Ftexto%252F184425%3B645%3B344

Biotechnology

     My suggestion to start reading, I will first explain what is Biotechnology. We can say that the use and applications of chemical and biological knowledge, technology in the food, environmental and health area is the function of a biotechnologist, since it is responsible for studying the genetic improvement and the creation of new products, among other areas of knowledge that this professional can act. 

     With this in mind, let's read my suggestion, "Brave transgenic World", available at: http://www.unesp.br/aci/jornal/151/biotecno.htm

     Whenever the topic transgenic is treated in the media, it divides opinion among environmentalists, researchers and industry ... But why the line is so thin? 

Nuclear Energy: should or should not be used – Part 2

     It is know that a failure can cause in immeasurable proportions. In nuclear power plants these faults can be as catastrophic to cause numerous deaths and serious environmental damages.
   

     Nuclear energy: should we use it or not? On Part 1 we saw some of the pros and cons of using nuclear technology for energy. Now we look at some of the most serious and known nuclear accidents that have happened in the world.