Speaker 1: Welcome to hows to Works Now. I'm your host, Lauren Vogelbaum,
Speaker 1: a researcher and writer. Here at hous toff Works. Every week,
Speaker 1: I'm bringing you three stories from our team about the
Speaker 1: weird and wondrous advances we've seen in science, technology, and culture.
Speaker 1: This week, a long running mystery about how Tornado's work
Speaker 1: has been solved, and unrelated research into how medical services
Speaker 1: are underused and overused around the world could help make
Speaker 1: us all healthier. But first, senior editor Katherine Whitbourne and
Speaker 1: our freelance writer David Rouse explain a bit of political science.
Speaker 1: We wanted to answer a question that came up in
Speaker 1: our weekly editorial meeting, Why do we care about the
Speaker 1: first one hundred days of a presidency? Right after a
Speaker 1: president's inauguration, the media starts to speculate what his first
Speaker 1: hundred days will be like. But why the fascination? After all,
Speaker 1: we liked presidents for terms of one, four hundred and
Speaker 1: sixty days. What's so important of out those first three
Speaker 1: months and change? You can blame Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Jonathan Ladd,
Speaker 1: Associate Professor of Public Policy and Government at Georgetown University, says,
Speaker 1: FDR's first hundred days were so productive that people have
Speaker 1: talked about it ever since. Roosevelt came to power in
Speaker 1: three in the depths of the Great Depression. He signed
Speaker 1: seventy six pieces of legislation in his first hundred days.
Speaker 1: Among them, he took the US off the gold standard,
Speaker 1: He revamped the banking system, and created jobs through the
Speaker 1: Civilian Conservation Corps and the Tennessee Valley Authority. No president
Speaker 1: has even come close to this productivity. John F. Kennedy
Speaker 1: passed twenty six bills, Ronald Reagan about nine, Barack Obama eleven.
Speaker 1: But that doesn't shake the fixation on the first hundred days.
Speaker 1: It remains a benchmark of political efficiency and a convenient
Speaker 1: measure of a new president's power. So here's what's significant
Speaker 1: about that hundred days. New presidents have a sort of
Speaker 1: honeymoon period with Congress, so it's easier to push a
Speaker 1: new White House legislative agenda. Historically, most presidents come in
Speaker 1: with high approval ratings from voters, and in the past,
Speaker 1: senators and representatives would cross the alta vote with them.
Speaker 1: Professor Ladd explains that even George W. Bush, who won
Speaker 1: the two thousand election, by the slimmest of margins, was
Speaker 1: popular enough that conservative leaning Democrats helped past his two
Speaker 1: thousand one tax cut package. Ladd says this is unlikely
Speaker 1: to happen nowadays, since there are a lot fewer conservative
Speaker 1: Democrats and liberal Republicans than there used to be, and
Speaker 1: President Donald Trump came into power with low approval ratings.
Speaker 1: Another reason lots of legislation gets passed during that first
Speaker 1: hundred days is the political changing of the guard. When
Speaker 1: the White House and Congress are controlled by the same party,
Speaker 1: previously defeated bills may get a second chance at life.
Speaker 1: For instance, Bill Clinton signed the Family and Medical Leave
Speaker 1: Act within days of taking office in n He could
Speaker 1: act so swiftly because the same bill had previously been
Speaker 1: passed by Congress and vetoed by George H. W. Bush.
Speaker 1: So the bill is ready to go. Clinton just need
Speaker 1: is to sign it. The other thing that makes those
Speaker 1: first hundred days so productive is executive actions. Presidents often
Speaker 1: use these to reverse the executive actions of their predecessors.
Speaker 1: One prime example is the Global Gag rule, which bars
Speaker 1: any foreign organization receiving US aid from performing or promoting abortions.
Speaker 1: The rule has been enacted and rescinded by executive order
Speaker 1: every time the White House has changed political hands since
Speaker 1: Ronald Reagan. As you might expect, Trump has reinstated the
Speaker 1: executive order that Obama rescinded, and chances are we can
Speaker 1: expect a lot more actions like these in the coming
Speaker 1: weeks and months. Next up, staff editor Christopher Hassiotas and
Speaker 1: freelance writer Patrick Jake Kaiger bring us the scariest science
Speaker 1: I've heard this week. Researchers have figured out why the
Speaker 1: inside of tornadoes get super cold and leave you gasping
Speaker 1: for air. Their data could inspire better technologies and fluid dynamics.
Speaker 1: On a summer afternoon in June nineteen fifty five, a
Speaker 1: huge tornado touched down in central Nebraska. It zoomed down
Speaker 1: and across the North Platte River toward the town of Scottsbluff,
Speaker 1: where it would reak havoc. Moments later, three reporters from
Speaker 1: a radio station's mobile broadcasting units spotted the funnel just
Speaker 1: north of town and tried to flee by driving through
Speaker 1: a local cemetery, but they were trapped. They encountered a
Speaker 1: lock gate at the other end, and with their escape
Speaker 1: cut off. They ditched their vehicle to take refuge in
Speaker 1: the basement of a stone building nearby, but they left
Speaker 1: the radio transmitter running so the public could hear the
Speaker 1: storm's fury. The three broadcasters huddled around the basement furnace
Speaker 1: and waited for the tornado to reach them. Pretty soon,
Speaker 1: strange things started happening. First they saw shovels, hoes, rakes,
Speaker 1: and other tools sucked up and out through the basement's
Speaker 1: entrance ramp. Then came total darkness and a deep, deep roar,
Speaker 1: and the basement furnace twisted and heaved. Then for a
Speaker 1: short time, the men found themselves inside the vortex of
Speaker 1: a tornado. Suddenly they felt the temperature drop from a
Speaker 1: mild early summer warmth to an unseasonal coolness, and they
Speaker 1: had a difficult time breathing now. Fortunately, within minutes, the
Speaker 1: roar of the tornado moved off into the distance, and
Speaker 1: the reporters were able to step out of the stone building,
Speaker 1: which miraculously had suffered only slight damage, while other structures
Speaker 1: around it had been leveled. That's a pretty amazing story
Speaker 1: of luck and survival, but for decades a few details
Speaker 1: about it puzzled scientists, why was the air inside a
Speaker 1: tornado's vortex colder and thinner than the air around it. Now,
Speaker 1: more than six decades later, researched by Jorgos Fautistas, a
Speaker 1: mechanical and industrial engineering professor at Montreal's Concordia University, and
Speaker 1: two of his recent graduate students, badwal Ger Pritz Singh
Speaker 1: and Rahul Rampa, offers an explanation. Fatistas has been studying
Speaker 1: intense vortices, both ones found in nature and man made ones,
Speaker 1: for more than a quarter century, and in recent years
Speaker 1: he's upgraded his mathematical model to account for factors such
Speaker 1: as density variation and the effects of turbulence in the air.
Speaker 1: He and his team were able to use the new
Speaker 1: model to figure out that it all comes down to
Speaker 1: air pockets. Now. Air pockets are localized regions of air
Speaker 1: with lower pressure than the surrounding atmosphere as air pockets
Speaker 1: within a vortex. In this case, the nineteen tornado moved
Speaker 1: from the edge of the vortex towards its center. The
Speaker 1: pockets expand. That expansion brings down the temperature of the
Speaker 1: air and also makes it thinner. So the more the
Speaker 1: pockets expand, the colder it gets, and the thinner the
Speaker 1: air gets. In the case of this Nebraska tornado, the
Speaker 1: temperature dropped from eighty point six to fifty three point
Speaker 1: six degrees fahrenheit or twenty seven to twelve degrees celsius,
Speaker 1: and the density of the air felt less than what
Speaker 1: you might find high in the mountains, where climbers have
Speaker 1: to wear special gear to breathe. That explains why the
Speaker 1: trap broadcasters felt chilly and gasped for air. Batista says
Speaker 1: that the nineteen fifty five account was the most detailed
Speaker 1: account of people surviving the inside of a tornado available.
Speaker 1: The new modeling approach, which he developed and described in
Speaker 1: the Journal of Aircraft of the American Institute of Aeronautics
Speaker 1: and astronaut will help scientists study violent atmospheric vortices such
Speaker 1: as tornadoes and water spouts, and beyond understanding the atmosphere,
Speaker 1: this new model also should prove useful as an engineering
Speaker 1: tool for optimizing the vortex refrigeration tubes used in industrial
Speaker 1: processes and for cooling electronic components. And finally, this week,
Speaker 1: I've got a story for you from our freelancer Aliya
Speaker 1: Quoit about medical science. A series of papers has revealed
Speaker 1: the global effects of both the overuse and the under
Speaker 1: use of particular medical services. The overuse and under use
Speaker 1: of medical services is a global healthcare crisis, but the
Speaker 1: medical industry is desperately trying to remedy. As described in
Speaker 1: a series of papers published by The Lancet in January
Speaker 1: of seventeen, these problems are happening around the world, with
Speaker 1: both overuse and under use often occurring side by side
Speaker 1: throughout various economies, with both leading to poor health and
Speaker 1: well being. Medical service says that are overused often cause
Speaker 1: more harm than good because they're applied inappropriately. As the
Speaker 1: researchers explain in the first paper in the series, overuse
Speaker 1: of unneeded services can harm patients physically and psychologically, and
Speaker 1: can harm health systems by wasting resources and deflecting investments
Speaker 1: in both public health and social spending, which is known
Speaker 1: to contribute to health. The researchers outlined a number of
Speaker 1: areas where overuse is commonly reported medications, screening tests, diagnostic tests,
Speaker 1: therapeutic procedures including surgery and other invasive procedures, site of
Speaker 1: care delivery, such as staying in the hospital when less
Speaker 1: intensive care would suffice and end of life care. Each
Speaker 1: of these areas are vital and even life saving when
Speaker 1: they're indicated by patient history, symptoms, and other specific considerations,
Speaker 1: but when used carelessly, the burden is great for both patients,
Speaker 1: many of whom still lack adequate insurance, and the health
Speaker 1: care system. Among these, medication overuses one of the most
Speaker 1: publicly acknowledged examples, especially the overuse of antibiotics. When prescribed unnecessarily,
Speaker 1: the threat of microbe old resistance increases, putting both the
Speaker 1: patient and the general population at risk. Expensive and sometimes
Speaker 1: invasive diagnostic tests like endoscopy and colonoscopy are also commonly overused,
Speaker 1: with the US alone reporting an overuse rate of sixtent
Speaker 1: for colonoscopy. The anxiety of not catching something serious leads
Speaker 1: to this type of overuse. Over diagnosis and subsequent labeling
Speaker 1: can also be harmful, and not just because patients might
Speaker 1: be taking drugs that they don't actually need. A d
Speaker 1: h D is one example that's particularly prevalent in high
Speaker 1: income countries. As the researchers explain their scant research on
Speaker 1: the effect of an a d h D diagnosis on
Speaker 1: a child's sense of self esteem and ability to modulate
Speaker 1: their own behavior. But the label has been shown to
Speaker 1: affect teachers expectations and peer interactions, which can substantially influence
Speaker 1: a child self perceptions. But let's talk about under use.
Speaker 1: If there's an affordable, effective medical service available that's likely
Speaker 1: to improve your quality of life, it's obvious that people
Speaker 1: should use it. Right in a perfect world, the answer
Speaker 1: is yes, but many roadblocks can stand in the way.
Speaker 1: In both wealthy and poor countries, low cost treatments are
Speaker 1: sometimes passed over in favor of expensive technologies. Known causes
Speaker 1: of under use include lack of access to affordable healthcare,
Speaker 1: not enough doctors or other medical resources to meet the demand,
Speaker 1: doctors who need more training and new techniques and recommendations,
Speaker 1: and general failure by physicians to deliver the appropriate recommended care.
Speaker 1: Often patients choose not to access care or decline recommended treatment,
Speaker 1: largely because of issues like language barriers, stigma, culture, distance,
Speaker 1: and a general lack of desire and time to navigate
Speaker 1: the administrative side of obtaining healthcare. That's our show for
Speaker 1: this week. Thank you so much for tuning in further
Speaker 1: thanks to our audio producer, Dylan Fagan and our editorial liaisons.
Speaker 1: Alice in Laudermilk and Christopher. Subscribe to now Now for
Speaker 1: more of the latest science news, and send us links
Speaker 1: to anything you'd like to hear his cover, plus your
Speaker 1: favorite regional snack food. I just discovered that boiled peanuts
Speaker 1: exist and I'm obsessed. You can send us an email
Speaker 1: at now podcast at how stuff works dot com, and
Speaker 1: of course, for lots more stories like these, head on
Speaker 1: over to our home planet, now dot how stuff works
Speaker 1: dot com.