WEBVTT - The 2025 Ig Nobels, Part 2 0:00:03.040 --> 0:00:06.760 Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind production of iHeartRadio. 0:00:12.840 --> 0:00:15.280 Hey you welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind. My 0:00:15.400 --> 0:00:16.640 name is Robert Lamb. 0:00:16.640 --> 0:00:19.200 And I'm Joe McCormick, and we're back with part two 0:00:19.320 --> 0:00:21.840 in our series about the winners of the twenty twenty 0:00:21.840 --> 0:00:26.400 five ig Nobel Prizes. This is something we cover almost 0:00:26.440 --> 0:00:28.640 every year here on the show, though of course we're 0:00:28.680 --> 0:00:31.160 not affiliated with the prizes in anyway. It's just something 0:00:31.160 --> 0:00:34.519 we like to talk about. The Ignobels are given out 0:00:34.600 --> 0:00:37.840 usually in September of each year by a scientific humor 0:00:37.880 --> 0:00:42.040 journal called the Annals of Improbable Research, edited for many 0:00:42.120 --> 0:00:45.919 years by Mark Abrahams, and the state admission of the 0:00:45.960 --> 0:00:49.840 Ignobel Prizes is to honor achievements that first make people 0:00:49.920 --> 0:00:53.120 laugh and then make them think. If you haven't listened 0:00:53.120 --> 0:00:54.720 to part one yet, you can go back and check 0:00:54.800 --> 0:00:57.520 that one out first. But for a brief recap. In 0:00:57.560 --> 0:01:00.280 the last episode, we talked about the twenty two twenty 0:01:00.280 --> 0:01:02.680 five prize in nutrition, which went to a team who 0:01:02.760 --> 0:01:07.039 studied lizards eating pizza. The prize for psychology for a 0:01:07.080 --> 0:01:10.160 paper that looked at whether people become more narcissistic when 0:01:10.200 --> 0:01:13.520 you tell them that they're really smart. And the twenty 0:01:13.560 --> 0:01:16.840 twenty five Prize for Aviation, which went to a study 0:01:16.880 --> 0:01:19.720 on whether fruit bats become worse at flying when they 0:01:19.760 --> 0:01:23.000 get drunk. Is that about right, Rob, Yes, and they do. 0:01:24.920 --> 0:01:26.600 And we're back today to talk about more. 0:01:27.040 --> 0:01:29.480 All right. Just a reminder again, we're not covering all 0:01:29.520 --> 0:01:34.240 the winners. We're just doing two helpings, really, each of 0:01:34.280 --> 0:01:36.919 us going in and grabbing some stuff, discussing the studies 0:01:36.959 --> 0:01:39.040 we want to talk about, papers we want to talk about, 0:01:39.080 --> 0:01:43.600 but by all means, go to the website improbable dot 0:01:43.600 --> 0:01:46.320 com and you can learn more about this year's winners, 0:01:46.400 --> 0:01:48.440 last year's winners. They have one of these great like 0:01:48.560 --> 0:01:51.840 single page readouts where you can just scan through everything 0:01:51.880 --> 0:01:55.080 that they've covered over the years. A rarity in today's 0:01:55.120 --> 0:01:55.639 web space. 0:01:55.800 --> 0:01:57.919 Yeah, a great thing to send to your office printer 0:01:58.120 --> 0:01:58.880 and just get again. 0:02:00.320 --> 0:02:01.360 Yeah. 0:02:01.440 --> 0:02:04.800 Okay, So the first award that I wanted to talk 0:02:04.840 --> 0:02:08.200 about today is the twenty twenty five Biology Prize, which 0:02:08.320 --> 0:02:11.079 was presented to and there's a long list of names here. 0:02:11.120 --> 0:02:14.960 As always, apologies for any mispronunciations, but the team was 0:02:15.680 --> 0:02:23.280 Tomoki Kojima, Kazato Oishi, Yasushi Matsubara, Yuki Uchiyama, Yoshihiko Fukushima, 0:02:23.560 --> 0:02:31.080 Naoto Aoki, say Sato, Tatsuaki Masuda, Junichi Yueida, hiro Yuki Hiruka, 0:02:31.160 --> 0:02:35.920 and Katsutoshi Kino, and then to quote the prize language 0:02:36.160 --> 0:02:40.000 for their experiments to learn whether cows painted with zebra 0:02:40.200 --> 0:02:44.239 like striping can avoid being bitten by flies? Yes, that 0:02:44.360 --> 0:02:47.680 said painted. So the question is can you keep parasitic 0:02:47.760 --> 0:02:51.840 insects off your cows by just painting some zebra stripes 0:02:51.880 --> 0:02:54.880 on them? The paper in question was published in twenty 0:02:54.960 --> 0:02:57.600 nineteen in the journal plus one, and it was called 0:02:58.000 --> 0:03:02.359 Cows painted with zebra like striping can avoid biting fly attacks. 0:03:02.360 --> 0:03:05.360 It kind of gives away the result there. But the 0:03:05.440 --> 0:03:08.600 funny thing about this study is that this is actually 0:03:08.639 --> 0:03:12.600 not the first time, not this paper in particular, but 0:03:12.800 --> 0:03:16.000 research on this general subject has come up on the show. 0:03:16.840 --> 0:03:20.079 We talked about this in a listener Mail episode last year, 0:03:20.160 --> 0:03:23.320 which was was from August twenty twenty four. Rob, Was 0:03:23.360 --> 0:03:26.280 this an episode that I did solo or were you 0:03:25.760 --> 0:03:27.560 on this episode with me? 0:03:27.800 --> 0:03:30.120 I don't recall. This is one of those areas that 0:03:30.280 --> 0:03:33.440 I feel like I have podcasted on before, but I'm 0:03:33.440 --> 0:03:38.280 not sure how recently, you know, getting into the coloration 0:03:38.400 --> 0:03:42.280 of zebras and so forth, and you know the evolved 0:03:42.320 --> 0:03:43.520 reason for the stripes. 0:03:44.000 --> 0:03:46.880 Yeah, so maybe this was a solo listener mail episode 0:03:46.920 --> 0:03:50.440 that I did. Anyway, the context in which this came 0:03:50.480 --> 0:03:53.720 up was a message from our listener Jeremy, who at 0:03:53.720 --> 0:03:56.560 the time had written into the show address that's contact 0:03:56.640 --> 0:03:59.520 at stuff to Blow your mind dot com, asking for 0:03:59.560 --> 0:04:02.240 our thoughts on an attached photo which was of a 0:04:02.360 --> 0:04:06.360 horse grazing in a fenced pasture draped in a cloth 0:04:06.520 --> 0:04:09.960 with black and white zebra print. Which is funny already 0:04:09.960 --> 0:04:12.880 because I think, not knowing the reason for this, a 0:04:12.880 --> 0:04:15.080 lot of people's first assumption might be that this is 0:04:15.200 --> 0:04:18.320 just a horse somebody has dressed up in a zebra 0:04:18.360 --> 0:04:22.240 costume for esthetic reasons, maybe Halloween unclear. 0:04:22.520 --> 0:04:26.400 Yeah, I mean somebody's pasture poodle. So maybe they just 0:04:26.440 --> 0:04:28.040 have a jazzy outfit. 0:04:27.760 --> 0:04:32.440 On, right, So Jeremy asked if the purpose was actually 0:04:32.520 --> 0:04:36.640 to repel biting flies, since there is some evidence that 0:04:36.720 --> 0:04:39.839 zebra stripes may work to keep flies off the skin. 0:04:40.880 --> 0:04:43.279 I looked into this a little bit, and I concluded 0:04:43.320 --> 0:04:46.120 at the time that the horse in the picture was 0:04:46.200 --> 0:04:49.440 wearing what's called a fly sheet. I had no previous 0:04:49.480 --> 0:04:53.159 knowledge of this at all, but I assume most horse 0:04:53.160 --> 0:04:55.919 owners and farmers and ranchers will be quite familiar with 0:04:55.960 --> 0:05:00.480 this kind of product. So fly sheets are lightweight bankets, 0:05:00.560 --> 0:05:02.920 usually made out of some kind of mesh fabric that 0:05:02.960 --> 0:05:06.040 you drape over a horse to keep flies and other 0:05:06.120 --> 0:05:09.200 insects from biting the horse. And if you google these products, 0:05:09.200 --> 0:05:11.760 you'll find that other uses are advertised as well, like 0:05:11.800 --> 0:05:16.159 protecting animals from UV radiation. From what I'm reading, these 0:05:16.200 --> 0:05:20.160 things work pretty well at their main job. But that 0:05:20.200 --> 0:05:22.919 doesn't mean that you can just protect all your horses 0:05:22.960 --> 0:05:25.560 permanently by dressing them in fly sheets and then just 0:05:25.640 --> 0:05:29.400 leaving them on all the time. Apparently, some horses do 0:05:29.400 --> 0:05:31.880 not like the sheets. They find them irritating and they 0:05:31.880 --> 0:05:34.159 try to shake them or rub them off, which could 0:05:34.240 --> 0:05:37.719 lead to injury. Also, there is some injury risk just 0:05:37.800 --> 0:05:40.640 from the horse knocking it part way off and then 0:05:40.640 --> 0:05:43.720 getting it tangled on something. And also you can't leave 0:05:43.760 --> 0:05:46.159 it on forever for the same reason that you shouldn't 0:05:46.240 --> 0:05:49.239 leave the same piece of human clothing on forever. Eventually 0:05:49.320 --> 0:05:52.320 it gets dirty and damp and hot, and it irritates 0:05:52.360 --> 0:05:56.720 the skin, possibly leading to overheating or to skin infections. 0:05:57.120 --> 0:06:00.400 So fly sheets can protect your horse from fly bites 0:06:00.480 --> 0:06:02.960 to some extent, but you've got to balance the pros 0:06:03.000 --> 0:06:06.400 and cons, and even for horses that tolerate them, well, 0:06:06.760 --> 0:06:08.919 it's not just a putg it on once and forget 0:06:08.960 --> 0:06:12.479 about it solution. But the thing I wondered about in 0:06:12.760 --> 0:06:17.760 this image was if the fly sheet is itself a 0:06:17.800 --> 0:06:23.600 physical barrier against fly bytes, what would be the additional benefit, 0:06:23.720 --> 0:06:27.760 if anything, of having an insect repelling pattern printed on 0:06:27.800 --> 0:06:30.840 the fly sheet? If that is indeed what zebra stripes 0:06:30.880 --> 0:06:33.119 even do. We'll explore that question more in a minute. 0:06:33.160 --> 0:06:37.440 But wouldn't the sheet itself provide the protection whether it 0:06:37.480 --> 0:06:40.359 was printed with zebra stripes or leopard print or you 0:06:40.400 --> 0:06:43.560 know whatever individual frames from the Boxer's omen just like 0:06:43.600 --> 0:06:46.720 the whole movie on the side of the horse. Maybe 0:06:46.800 --> 0:06:49.240 maybe there is an additional benefit, but I'm skeptical. 0:06:49.560 --> 0:06:53.200 I mean, that would have venture to guess. Maybe it 0:06:53.240 --> 0:06:57.520 would be a situation where the stripes would keep flies 0:06:57.600 --> 0:07:01.520 potentially away from the uncovered portions of the horse as well, 0:07:01.560 --> 0:07:03.920 Like the flies in question would be like, oh, there's 0:07:03.960 --> 0:07:06.480 a zebra colored horse over there. I'm going to ignore 0:07:06.560 --> 0:07:09.360 this horse entirely, even the parts that aren't zebra e 0:07:09.680 --> 0:07:11.280 And I'm just going to go check out this other 0:07:11.400 --> 0:07:12.600 certified non zebra. 0:07:12.920 --> 0:07:15.720 Well, yeah, that is a totally reasonable thing to wonder, 0:07:15.720 --> 0:07:17.520 except I think in at least one of the studies 0:07:17.520 --> 0:07:20.600 we're about to look at, it mentions that when supplemental 0:07:20.680 --> 0:07:23.080 zebra stripes are given to some animals, they still got 0:07:23.080 --> 0:07:24.760 bitten on the parts that weren't covered. 0:07:24.880 --> 0:07:26.000 So okay, well, there you go. 0:07:26.600 --> 0:07:28.880 But I don't know. Maybe it reduces the bites on 0:07:28.920 --> 0:07:31.720 the uncovered parts even though it doesn't totally eliminate them. 0:07:31.760 --> 0:07:35.040 I don't know, but anyway, so questions. I don't know 0:07:35.040 --> 0:07:38.200 whether that would be beneficial or not. Now. In that 0:07:38.320 --> 0:07:41.560 listener mail episode, I talked about a different study on 0:07:41.680 --> 0:07:46.200 zebra stripes and biting insects, also from twenty nineteen, also 0:07:46.280 --> 0:07:49.840 in the Journal plus one, so same journal and year 0:07:50.000 --> 0:07:53.760 as the Ignobel Prize winning study here. That paper was 0:07:53.760 --> 0:07:58.400 called Benefits of Zebra stripes Behavior of Tabinid flies around 0:07:58.560 --> 0:08:02.800 zebras and horses. That was by Caro at All short 0:08:02.840 --> 0:08:06.560 summary of that one. Over the years, researchers have proposed 0:08:06.600 --> 0:08:10.080 a lot of different evolutionary reasons that zebras might have stripes. 0:08:10.640 --> 0:08:14.080 Maybe the stripes somehow regulate body temperature, for example, maybe 0:08:14.080 --> 0:08:17.320 they helped the zebra avoid overheating in the sun somehow, 0:08:17.840 --> 0:08:21.960 maybe they are a type of visual camouflage confusing predators. 0:08:22.360 --> 0:08:25.520 But a very promising idea is that somehow the stripes 0:08:25.560 --> 0:08:32.040 protect zebras against ectoparasitic insects like biting flies quote quoting 0:08:32.080 --> 0:08:36.239 the authors. Here, we examined the behavior of tabanids, horseflies 0:08:36.600 --> 0:08:40.800 in the vicinity of captive planes, zebras, and uniformly colored 0:08:40.840 --> 0:08:45.120 domestic horses living on a horse farm in Britain. Observations 0:08:45.160 --> 0:08:48.920 showed that fewer tabanids landed on zebras than on horses 0:08:49.000 --> 0:08:53.320 per unit time, although rates of tabanids circling around or 0:08:53.400 --> 0:08:57.920 briefly touching zebra and horse pillage did not differ. So 0:08:58.200 --> 0:09:01.319 interesting finding. The horses and zebra has had equal numbers 0:09:01.360 --> 0:09:06.199 of flies swarming around them, but the flies successfully landed 0:09:06.320 --> 0:09:09.319 on the zebras less often, which presumably means they were 0:09:09.320 --> 0:09:12.760 able to bite the zebras less often. And in a 0:09:12.800 --> 0:09:15.480 secondary experiment, the authors found that if you placed a 0:09:15.640 --> 0:09:19.160 zebra patterned coat on a horse compared to coats of 0:09:19.440 --> 0:09:22.640 solid white or solid black, it reduced the number of 0:09:22.640 --> 0:09:26.520 tabinid flies that landed on the horse. The horseflies still 0:09:26.600 --> 0:09:30.520 landed on and bit like exposed unpatterned parts of the 0:09:30.559 --> 0:09:34.440 horse's bodies, like the head. So the question is if 0:09:34.559 --> 0:09:39.080 zebra stripes prevent flies or help help reduce the amount 0:09:39.160 --> 0:09:41.640 that flies land on you, how do they do that? 0:09:42.400 --> 0:09:47.000 The author's right quote. In separate detailed video analyzes, tabanids 0:09:47.080 --> 0:09:53.679 approached zebras faster and failed to decelerate before contacting zebras, 0:09:54.040 --> 0:09:58.840 and proportionately more tabinids simply touched rather than landed on 0:09:59.000 --> 0:10:04.040 zebra pelage in comparison to horses. So, according to this 0:10:04.520 --> 0:10:08.760 other research, when you have zebra stripes, biting flies have 0:10:08.840 --> 0:10:13.280 a harder time slowing down their flight and landing correctly 0:10:13.320 --> 0:10:15.840 on your skin, and they're more likely to kind of 0:10:15.960 --> 0:10:20.160 fly into you at higher speed and bounce off without landing. 0:10:20.840 --> 0:10:22.679 That's kind of interesting. It's like putting some kind of 0:10:22.760 --> 0:10:25.840 dazzle your on your airport runway. You know, it makes 0:10:25.880 --> 0:10:27.240 it hard to land the plane. 0:10:27.360 --> 0:10:31.640 Now you're messing with the fly maneuverability and landing ability. Yeah. 0:10:31.679 --> 0:10:34.080 And also note that when I looked into this last year, 0:10:34.640 --> 0:10:37.120 I read some coverage, including an article in the BBC 0:10:37.200 --> 0:10:39.880 that quoted other scientists in the field who were not 0:10:40.080 --> 0:10:44.360 fully convinced that they that fly repellent properties were the 0:10:44.360 --> 0:10:48.240 main evolutionary reason for zebra stripes. A few reasons for 0:10:48.679 --> 0:10:52.360 doubt they're a major one being are biting flies really 0:10:52.520 --> 0:10:57.160 a primary fitness concern for wild zebras. Some researchers were 0:10:57.200 --> 0:11:00.000 skeptical that they were, so this is not a full 0:11:00.160 --> 0:11:04.439 settled issue. But that brings us to the Ignobel prize 0:11:04.480 --> 0:11:07.319 winning paper on this topic. Again, that's the Kojima at 0:11:07.320 --> 0:11:11.080 All paper from twenty nineteen. To summarize this one, the 0:11:11.120 --> 0:11:14.520 authors cite the previous research showing that zebra stripes seem 0:11:14.600 --> 0:11:19.360 to reduce attacks by biting flies, and however much this 0:11:19.640 --> 0:11:23.440 is or is not really a major fitness concern for 0:11:23.559 --> 0:11:26.880 zebras in the wild, the authors argued that it is 0:11:26.960 --> 0:11:31.120 of major significance to people who raise domestic animals like cattle. 0:11:31.559 --> 0:11:35.560 They write, quote, biting flies are serious pests of livestock 0:11:35.720 --> 0:11:40.480 that cause economic losses in animal production. Now you might think, like, 0:11:40.640 --> 0:11:45.160 how do fly bytes cause those losses. Well, they actually explain. 0:11:45.240 --> 0:11:49.080 They say, cattle find these biting flies really annoying, and 0:11:49.280 --> 0:11:53.560 they change their behavior to try to protect themselves from 0:11:53.600 --> 0:11:57.439 fly bites. So cattle that are bothered by biting flies 0:11:57.840 --> 0:12:01.240 spend less time feeding and grazing, they spend less time 0:12:01.360 --> 0:12:06.480 bedding down, and they also engage in direct defensive behaviors. 0:12:06.559 --> 0:12:10.920 These defensive behaviors can involve a lot of violent body movements, 0:12:11.000 --> 0:12:15.120 maybe flicking the tail, stomping around, shaking their heads, and 0:12:15.160 --> 0:12:20.040 twitching the muscles on the skin. Cattle will also crowd 0:12:20.200 --> 0:12:23.959 their bodies together to decrease their surface area and protect 0:12:23.960 --> 0:12:27.680 themselves from flies. And the authors argue that all of 0:12:27.720 --> 0:12:32.960 these behaviors cause economic losses since the cattle expend energy 0:12:33.080 --> 0:12:36.920 doing this stuff, they eat and they rest less, and 0:12:37.160 --> 0:12:41.440 crowding or bunching together in particular, seems bad. Quote. Bunching 0:12:41.559 --> 0:12:45.160 increases heat, stress and risk of injury as animals jostle 0:12:45.240 --> 0:12:48.360 for a better position to avoid biting flies, and this 0:12:48.480 --> 0:12:51.480 can reduce weight gains in feed lot beef cattle and 0:12:51.720 --> 0:12:56.720 milk yield in dairy cows. So this doesn't necessarily prove it, 0:12:56.800 --> 0:13:00.200 but I think it's a reasonable inference that if if 0:13:00.200 --> 0:13:05.000 biting flies cause these measurable economic losses for domestic cattle owners, 0:13:05.400 --> 0:13:09.640 they might well translate to similar evolutionary losses for animals 0:13:09.679 --> 0:13:12.080 in nature. We don't know for sure, but it seems 0:13:12.120 --> 0:13:12.840 quite possible. 0:13:13.440 --> 0:13:14.880 It sounds reasonable anyway. 0:13:15.000 --> 0:13:18.319 So, building on the previous findings that biting flies either 0:13:18.559 --> 0:13:22.280 avoid or have trouble landing on zebra stripes versus on 0:13:22.360 --> 0:13:25.720 like a solid black or white surface, the authors ask 0:13:26.120 --> 0:13:30.160 what happens if you just paint a solid colored cow 0:13:30.360 --> 0:13:33.920 with zebra stripes? Will that keep the biting flies away? 0:13:34.400 --> 0:13:36.719 And if you wonder if there's a picture, Yes, there 0:13:36.760 --> 0:13:38.439 is a picture, Rob, I've got it for you to 0:13:38.480 --> 0:13:42.080 look at. Here. So this is a black cow that 0:13:42.120 --> 0:13:45.400 has been painted with white zebra stripes on the sides, 0:13:45.640 --> 0:13:48.559 like the flanks, not the head, but everywhere except the head, 0:13:48.600 --> 0:13:51.600 the flanks and the legs going all the way to 0:13:51.640 --> 0:13:52.280 the rear end. 0:13:52.640 --> 0:13:56.600 Yeah, this picture alone answers the question why is this funny? 0:13:57.440 --> 0:14:01.680 This is just in and of itself, laughter inducing to 0:14:01.720 --> 0:14:03.880 see this cow that has been painted up like a 0:14:03.960 --> 0:14:07.280 zebra like. Somehow, it's more hilarious, obviously than a horse 0:14:07.320 --> 0:14:09.920 being painted like a zebra. Maybe because like, you're not 0:14:09.920 --> 0:14:13.120 fooling anybody, Like I can't help but think this cow 0:14:13.240 --> 0:14:15.920 wants to be mistaken for a zebra and we're just 0:14:15.960 --> 0:14:16.600 not buying it. 0:14:16.679 --> 0:14:20.000 I'm not insulting anybody here, but it is funny that 0:14:20.080 --> 0:14:27.160 this picture has has labels for body and leg. Actually, 0:14:27.200 --> 0:14:29.240 maybe there's a good reason for this, Like maybe if 0:14:29.240 --> 0:14:33.760 they're if they're documenting where on the body the biting 0:14:33.760 --> 0:14:37.080 flies that were seen landing landed, you know, you want 0:14:37.080 --> 0:14:40.480 to note exactly where the boundaries are as you're considering. Yeah, 0:14:40.640 --> 0:14:42.920 so that makes more sense. But the label of body 0:14:43.000 --> 0:14:46.640 is really got me going. Which part is the head? 0:14:47.680 --> 0:14:51.960 So the authors they described their small experiment as follows quote. 0:14:52.600 --> 0:14:56.160 Six Japanese black cows were assigned to treatments using a 0:14:56.240 --> 0:14:59.720 three by three Latin square design. The treatments were black 0:14:59.760 --> 0:15:03.680 and white painted stripes, black painted stripes and no stripes, 0:15:03.840 --> 0:15:08.600 meaning an all black body surface. Recorded fly repelling behaviors 0:15:08.640 --> 0:15:13.200 were head throw, ear beat, leg stamp, skin twitch, and 0:15:13.320 --> 0:15:16.600 tail flick. Photo images of the right side of each 0:15:16.680 --> 0:15:20.560 cow were taken using a commercial digital camera after every observation, 0:15:21.200 --> 0:15:24.200 and biting flies on the body and each leg were 0:15:24.240 --> 0:15:27.960 counted from the photo images. Okay, so maybe that's why 0:15:27.960 --> 0:15:30.960 it's important to know exactly where the boundaries are here. 0:15:31.000 --> 0:15:33.800 We showed that the numbers of biting flies on Japanese 0:15:33.840 --> 0:15:37.280 black cows painted with black and white stripes were significantly 0:15:37.360 --> 0:15:41.240 lower than those on non painted cows and cows painted 0:15:41.320 --> 0:15:45.560 only with black stripes. The frequencies of fly repelling behaviors 0:15:45.560 --> 0:15:48.560 in cows painted with black and white stripes were also 0:15:48.840 --> 0:15:52.680 lower than those in the non painted and black striped cows. 0:15:53.760 --> 0:15:57.680 So again, in other words, compared to cows without stripes 0:15:57.840 --> 0:16:02.120 and black cows painted with blacks, black cows painted with 0:16:02.240 --> 0:16:06.120 black and white stripes had fewer biting flies land on 0:16:06.200 --> 0:16:10.320 them and also showed fewer fly repelling behaviors, all the 0:16:10.360 --> 0:16:13.840 different kinds of you know, the shoe fly dance. The 0:16:13.880 --> 0:16:16.680 authors say that based on these results, it may be 0:16:16.800 --> 0:16:20.560 the case that painting zebra stripes on solid colored livestock 0:16:20.720 --> 0:16:24.480 can reduce the burden from biting flies without resorting to 0:16:24.520 --> 0:16:29.720 other interventions like applying pesticides to livestock, which can also 0:16:29.760 --> 0:16:33.680 be effective, but that comes with downside such as contributing 0:16:33.720 --> 0:16:36.640 to long term pesticide resistance in the environment. 0:16:37.680 --> 0:16:40.560 So if true. It's one of those things where you 0:16:40.640 --> 0:16:43.040 might say, well, it doesn't cost that much to paint 0:16:43.080 --> 0:16:46.160 the cows, let's go ahead and do it regularly. Do 0:16:46.240 --> 0:16:48.920 it and if it's working a little bit, great. 0:16:49.000 --> 0:16:51.920 Yeah, seems like it. Now. One thing to note here 0:16:52.000 --> 0:16:54.560 is again this was a small experiment. There were just 0:16:54.600 --> 0:16:57.480 six cows here, so we should not draw like hugely 0:16:57.560 --> 0:16:59.960 firm conclusions based on it, and more of a pilot 0:17:00.280 --> 0:17:02.640 to open the way to more highly powered research. 0:17:02.920 --> 0:17:04.399 Yeah, as is often the case. 0:17:12.440 --> 0:17:12.680 Thank you. 0:17:14.520 --> 0:17:16.520 Well, let's move on to the next one. This is 0:17:16.840 --> 0:17:19.600 we want to highlight the chemistry prize. This one went 0:17:19.640 --> 0:17:25.359 to a twenty sixteen US Israeli paper titled Polytetraflora ethylene 0:17:25.760 --> 0:17:29.040 ingestion as a way to increase food volume and hint 0:17:29.160 --> 0:17:35.200 society without increasing calorie content, published in Obesity Technology, written 0:17:35.200 --> 0:17:37.520 by Neftalovich, Neftalovich and Greenway. 0:17:37.680 --> 0:17:43.640 Wait a minute, PTFE ingestion as a way to increase 0:17:43.720 --> 0:17:44.439 food volume. 0:17:45.160 --> 0:17:50.280 Exactly, Yes, And this is one of those selections where 0:17:50.359 --> 0:17:52.560 you can see why it is funny right at the 0:17:52.560 --> 0:17:57.720 front end of things, because PTFE is also known by 0:17:57.840 --> 0:18:02.400 the brand name Tefline. This is what John Gotti's teflon 0:18:02.520 --> 0:18:07.560 don nickname was about because one of its uses is 0:18:07.600 --> 0:18:10.440 in nonstick pans, right, so nothing sticks to it. Nothing 0:18:10.520 --> 0:18:13.879 stuck to John Gotti at least for a while that situation. 0:18:14.440 --> 0:18:16.720 Yeah, but it's not just used in cookwaar. 0:18:16.960 --> 0:18:17.440 No. 0:18:17.520 --> 0:18:20.960 Yeah, PTFE is a nonstick coating has like industrial and 0:18:21.040 --> 0:18:23.399 medical uses as well, and you find it in all 0:18:23.480 --> 0:18:24.160 kinds of stuff. 0:18:24.440 --> 0:18:29.560 That's right. It's a synthetic fluoropolymer discovered in nineteen thirty eight, discovered, 0:18:29.560 --> 0:18:32.200 invented however you want to look at it. It's commonly 0:18:32.600 --> 0:18:34.840 used in nonstick coating for cookwaar, but it's also used 0:18:34.840 --> 0:18:39.520 in wiring insulation, chemical resistance, lining coatings, and medical devices. 0:18:40.119 --> 0:18:44.399 As an electronic insulator. It's used in stain repellent fabrics 0:18:44.440 --> 0:18:49.480 and also in aerospace parts. So the funny part here is, 0:18:49.520 --> 0:18:55.240 obviously the authors are suggesting a brand new use for PTFE, 0:18:55.280 --> 0:18:57.400 and that is what if we ate it as a 0:18:57.400 --> 0:18:58.200 food additive. 0:18:58.560 --> 0:19:01.119 So it's just like you add a little bit of 0:19:01.160 --> 0:19:05.240 salt and pepper tear meal and you also sprinkle in 0:19:05.359 --> 0:19:06.040 some teflon. 0:19:06.400 --> 0:19:09.399 Oh, I think it would be more than sprinkling. What 0:19:09.480 --> 0:19:12.520 they're bulozing. Would be bulking it up like it would 0:19:12.520 --> 0:19:15.679 be like a smoothie powder that gets added to your food. 0:19:16.160 --> 0:19:20.360 And yeah, this paper boldly begins with the following quote, 0:19:20.359 --> 0:19:24.320 civilization has zero calorie drinks, but we have not yet 0:19:24.359 --> 0:19:27.440 made the leap into the realm of zero calorie foods. 0:19:27.800 --> 0:19:30.840 The first step toward achieving this goal is the ability 0:19:30.880 --> 0:19:34.920 to increase the volume of food without adding calories, the 0:19:34.960 --> 0:19:39.159 final frontier, if you will, of eating zero calorie polymers. 0:19:39.359 --> 0:19:40.719 I don't want to be a know it all, but 0:19:40.760 --> 0:19:46.800 there there are not quite zero calorie bulking items, but 0:19:46.840 --> 0:19:50.560 there are well known ways of bulking up food without 0:19:50.640 --> 0:19:53.600 massively increasing the amount of calorie. A big one is fiber. 0:19:54.560 --> 0:19:59.160 Yes, yes, yeah, but I guess part of it here 0:19:59.200 --> 0:20:00.840 is that there are and is that this would be 0:20:00.960 --> 0:20:06.320 mainly used to treat a obesity as the main factory here. 0:20:07.520 --> 0:20:09.960 But yes, it also raises a number of questions what 0:20:10.280 --> 0:20:13.320 we'll get to including you know, first of all, can 0:20:13.359 --> 0:20:15.800 we do this? But also should we do this? And 0:20:15.840 --> 0:20:20.200 indeed are there perhaps other things like fiber that maybe 0:20:20.200 --> 0:20:23.320 we should be putting in the end of the diet instead. 0:20:23.640 --> 0:20:26.679 Reading this study reminded me of a gag on thirty 0:20:26.800 --> 0:20:30.680 Rock where Jenna is on a diet and she says 0:20:30.680 --> 0:20:34.359 it's the Japanese paper diet, where she says I can 0:20:34.400 --> 0:20:36.240 only eat paper, but I can eat all the paper 0:20:36.240 --> 0:20:41.679 I want. Perfect Yeah, I mean to be clear, the 0:20:41.720 --> 0:20:45.240 idea of eating paper as a diet. Yeah, eating paper 0:20:45.480 --> 0:20:50.440 I think would technically net you zero calories because your 0:20:50.440 --> 0:20:53.600 digestive system can't break down the cellulose, the main component 0:20:53.640 --> 0:20:56.760 of paper or most paper anyway. But this is not 0:20:56.800 --> 0:21:00.280 recommended as it's not good for your digestion, and that's 0:21:00.320 --> 0:21:03.199 before you even consider potential chemical additives, and also the 0:21:03.240 --> 0:21:05.760 ink that may be on the paper. Though there are 0:21:06.080 --> 0:21:10.560 edible wrappings and even mediums for printing, I'm not sure 0:21:10.560 --> 0:21:12.320 you could really make a diet out of those either. 0:21:13.000 --> 0:21:15.679 But yeah, just the idea of eating paper for your diet. 0:21:15.760 --> 0:21:17.720 It works for a joke, I don't think it would 0:21:17.760 --> 0:21:23.200 work in real life. So back to consuming non flavored 0:21:23.240 --> 0:21:27.119 ptfes as part of your diet. To be fair, the 0:21:27.160 --> 0:21:29.919 proposal is a little more complicated than Hey, it has 0:21:30.000 --> 0:21:33.239 zero calories, so why don't we eat it? First of all, 0:21:33.280 --> 0:21:35.680 the general proposal is that it would be some sort 0:21:35.720 --> 0:21:38.440 of additive again, perhaps like a smoothie powder to bulk 0:21:38.520 --> 0:21:41.600 up actual food. You'd eat this food, but then a 0:21:41.640 --> 0:21:45.199 percentage of the food volume would be indigestible. It cannot 0:21:45.240 --> 0:21:48.959 be metabolized, so it just passes through, taking up space, 0:21:49.480 --> 0:21:53.240 giving you the feeling of being full without itself metabolizing. 0:21:53.600 --> 0:21:55.879 The rest of your meal would though. According to the paper, 0:21:56.359 --> 0:22:00.800 they present this as a quote non metabolized food volume 0:22:00.920 --> 0:22:05.880 bulking agent, and they charge that indeed PTFE is ideal 0:22:05.960 --> 0:22:08.600 for this because it's quote widely considered to be the 0:22:08.600 --> 0:22:12.000 most inert material known and is extremely stable. They also 0:22:12.119 --> 0:22:15.360 add that it succeeds in being quote inert safe, resistant 0:22:15.400 --> 0:22:19.240 to stomach acid, lax taste, available in powder form, smooth, 0:22:19.440 --> 0:22:21.720 resistant to heat, and also cost effective. 0:22:22.359 --> 0:22:24.400 Well, I think it's supposed to be resistant to heat 0:22:24.480 --> 0:22:26.840 up to a point, right, There is a point in 0:22:26.880 --> 0:22:29.920 which it becomes not resistant to heat, right right. 0:22:29.760 --> 0:22:33.960 I mean, anyone who's ever looked into ptf E coated cookware, 0:22:34.359 --> 0:22:36.480 there is a threshold beyond which you're not supposed to 0:22:36.520 --> 0:22:39.560 heat it because then there can be health concerns with 0:22:39.680 --> 0:22:41.439 you know, how things break down and what's released and 0:22:41.480 --> 0:22:44.960 so forth. I guess they're arguing that within the human body, 0:22:44.960 --> 0:22:47.640 you wouldn't reach that threshold, which well, thank you say, 0:22:47.920 --> 0:22:51.240 I mean, if you reach like five hundred degrees fahrenheit 0:22:51.320 --> 0:22:55.760 within the body, something terrible has gone wrong. And just 0:22:55.840 --> 0:22:58.800 speaking to the idea of PTF he's heating up in 0:22:58.840 --> 0:23:02.520 the body, not to any other potential health ramifications here, 0:23:02.880 --> 0:23:06.040 which again I think this obviously raises a ton of 0:23:06.119 --> 0:23:09.520 questions that are not necessarily addressed in this paper or 0:23:09.520 --> 0:23:11.639 would need to be addressed in follow up papers if 0:23:11.680 --> 0:23:15.080 there was like really a huge drive to get ptfees 0:23:15.520 --> 0:23:19.479 deliberately into food. But you know, that doesn't stop them 0:23:19.480 --> 0:23:22.679 from presenting some evidence. They point to some studies that 0:23:22.800 --> 0:23:25.760 claim that, and they claim that quote animal feeding trials 0:23:25.760 --> 0:23:28.200 showed that rats fed a diet of twenty five percent 0:23:28.240 --> 0:23:31.520 PTFE for ninety days had no signs of toxicity and 0:23:31.520 --> 0:23:34.439