Speaker 1: Welcome to hous To Works Now. I'm your host, Lauren Vogelbaum,
Speaker 1: a researcher and writer. Here at hous To 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, new research demonstrates how climate change may specifically
Speaker 1: affect weather in different areas in the near future. And unrelated,
Speaker 1: is it time for the United States military to have
Speaker 1: a dedicated space force? But first? Senior writer Jonathan Strickland
Speaker 1: explores the increasingly impressive makeup of maple syrup. A compound
Speaker 1: in the stuff could help humans treat a range of diseases,
Speaker 1: from cancer to antibiotic resistant superbugs. Maple syrup is more
Speaker 1: than just a tasty breakfast condiment. A couple of years ago,
Speaker 1: researchers discovered than extract in processed maple syrup has anti
Speaker 1: inflammatory qualities, meaning it could reduce pain and swelling in
Speaker 1: certain injuries. They named the extract Quebec call after Quebec,
Speaker 1: the region in Canada that leads the way in maple
Speaker 1: syrup production. They also discovered that this extract didn't appear
Speaker 1: to be present in maple sap itself. It was only
Speaker 1: when they processed the sap into syrup that they could
Speaker 1: find quebec call. And that's not all. In two thousand fifteen,
Speaker 1: researchers in Japan published a paper explaining how a phenolic
Speaker 1: extract of maple syrup can inhibit cancer cell growth and division.
Speaker 1: A phenomic compound is a crystalline substance, typically one with
Speaker 1: aromatic properties. The researchers wanted to be sure it wasn't
Speaker 1: just the high sugar content interfering with cancer cell division.
Speaker 1: They discovered that the phenomic extract interfered with a kat
Speaker 1: signaling pathways, which play a part in cellular growth and division.
Speaker 1: But wait, there's more. Recently, scientists from McGill University presented
Speaker 1: their sweet findings to the American Chemical Society. They discovered
Speaker 1: that a phenomic extract from maple syrup has another medically
Speaker 1: useful function. It boosts the effectiveness of antibiotics. We use
Speaker 1: antibiotics to fight off bacterial infections, but there's a risk
Speaker 1: populations of bacteria can over time develop a resistance to antibiotics,
Speaker 1: giving rise to superbugs. Mixing this maple syrup extract with
Speaker 1: a dose of antibiotics reduces the amount of medicine needed
Speaker 1: to kill a bacterial infection in fruit flies. In fact,
Speaker 1: the team found that with the extract they could reduce
Speaker 1: the amount of antibiotics by as much as ninety percent
Speaker 1: and still get the effect of a full dose. It
Speaker 1: turns out the compound affects the permeability of the bacterial
Speaker 1: cell walls, making it easier for antibiotics to pass through
Speaker 1: and do their thing. And honestly, it's pretty hard to
Speaker 1: blame the bacteria. Maple syrup is delicious. They're currently testing
Speaker 1: the extract in mice and it could take years of
Speaker 1: research and testing before the extract could be made available
Speaker 1: for the average human. But nonetheless, than next time you
Speaker 1: have band gigs, waffles, French toast, take a moment to
Speaker 1: thank the maple syrup. It's not just tasty, it's a
Speaker 1: potential life sape. Next up, I've got a story for
Speaker 1: you from our freelance writer Jesselyn Shields about the global
Speaker 1: state of the climate. One of the major influences on
Speaker 1: the billions of factors that go into weather is jet streams,
Speaker 1: high fast air currents that meander through Earth's atmosphere. They've
Speaker 1: always been fairly predictable, but they're changing, and sussing out
Speaker 1: the effects of those changes could help minimize disasters worldwide.
Speaker 1: Our collective grasp on the extreme weather consequences of climate
Speaker 1: change isn't great. Sure, our weather is changing, but if
Speaker 1: you ask a random person on the street what that's
Speaker 1: going to look like in their community in ten years
Speaker 1: or fifty, most of us probably couldn't even hazard a guess.
Speaker 1: Climate scientists, due to the nature of their work, no
Speaker 1: more than the rest of us, but even they don't
Speaker 1: always agree about the ways in which climate change will
Speaker 1: affect weather in specific races. In a controversial study published
Speaker 1: in the journal Geophysical Research, Letters challenged previously accepted ideas
Speaker 1: about the mechanisms through which climate change will affect our weather.
Speaker 1: Those accepted ideas including that warmer temperatures will result in
Speaker 1: more heat waves, that hotter summers will bring worse droughts,
Speaker 1: and that the warmer atmosphere will hold more water, resulting
Speaker 1: in heavier precipitation and flooding. All of this might still
Speaker 1: be true, but the studies suggested that something else might
Speaker 1: be happening as well, That the relatively predictable flow of
Speaker 1: Earth's weather is changing. Due to alterations in the behavior
Speaker 1: of the jet stream, especially in the middle latitudes, weather
Speaker 1: patterns are getting stuck in places for longer periods, thus
Speaker 1: intensifying on the ground effects, resulting in severe droughts, flooding,
Speaker 1: and intense heat waves. This concept has been controversial. The
Speaker 1: leading edge of research always has its supporters and detractors,
Speaker 1: but a study published in the March issue of Nature
Speaker 1: Scientific Reports reinforces it. The da is that climate change
Speaker 1: is altering the world's weather, making wind conveyor belts in
Speaker 1: a way that favors extreme and long lasting weather anomalies. Okay, so,
Speaker 1: jet streams are high atmospheric air currents that move from
Speaker 1: west to east, driven by Earth's rotation. They also make
Speaker 1: our weather happen. Although the winds of a jet stream
Speaker 1: flow in a single direction, the difference in temperature between
Speaker 1: the poles and the equator pulls those winds into meandering
Speaker 1: north south wave patterns. But if temperatures at the polls
Speaker 1: change more rapidly than those at the equator, those dual
Speaker 1: constraints on the jet streams become imbalanced. Michael Mann is
Speaker 1: the lead author of the new study and a professor
Speaker 1: of atmospheric science at Penn State, he told us via
Speaker 1: email quote, just like a coaxial cable acts as a
Speaker 1: wave guide to deliver electromagnetic waves to our televisions with
Speaker 1: minimal energy loss, the atmosphere tends to confine waves in
Speaker 1: the jet stream in a way that allows them to
Speaker 1: always travel with minimal energy loss. When the temperature difference
Speaker 1: between the all in the equator is large, the flow
Speaker 1: of the jet stream becomes stronger and the waves shorter.
Speaker 1: When the poles warm up at a faster rate than
Speaker 1: the equatorial regions do, like what's happening right now, it's
Speaker 1: most efficient for the atmospheric waves to stretch out and
Speaker 1: for the flow to thus become weaker, that is, slower.
Speaker 1: Man said. These very large north south meanders are associated
Speaker 1: with both extreme weather and weather getting stuck in place,
Speaker 1: leading to persistent regional droughts, flooding, heat waves, et cetera.
Speaker 1: We show that climate change is making a temperature pattern
Speaker 1: that supports those conditions more common, and you don't have
Speaker 1: to look far to find evidence of extreme weather hammering
Speaker 1: particular spots on the globe. Recently, in an intense low
Speaker 1: pressure system in Pakistan delivered unprecedented monsoon reigns resulting in flooding,
Speaker 1: killing some two thousand people and destroying the homes, crops,
Speaker 1: and livelihoods of eighteen million. More. There's also the two
Speaker 1: thousand three European heat wave, which is estimated to have
Speaker 1: caused thirty five thousand deaths, the Russian heat wave and wildfires,
Speaker 1: the eleven heat wave and drought in Oklahoma and Texas,
Speaker 1: and the California wildfires, to name just a few. But
Speaker 1: now that we're hopefully getting a better handle on how
Speaker 1: climate change might affect our lives here on the ground,
Speaker 1: Man and his co authors are looking at how this
Speaker 1: information can help us in the future. He leaves us
Speaker 1: with this, We hope this paper can inform the larger
Speaker 1: discourse over the very real risks that climate change poses
Speaker 1: to us. Secondly, there might also be the opportunity to
Speaker 1: use the information to try to predict when extreme weather
Speaker 1: events are most likely to occur. We hope so too. Finally,
Speaker 1: this week, our very own producer, Dylan Fagan and our
Speaker 1: freelancer Patrick Jake Haiger delve into a debate that's less
Speaker 1: like science fiction than it sounds. Some experts are saying
Speaker 1: that it's high time for the U. S. Department of
Speaker 1: Defense to develop a militarized branch in space. It's easy
Speaker 1: to think that the United States Air Force operates in
Speaker 1: the skies and NASA deals with space. Because of this,
Speaker 1: it may come as a surprise to learn that the
Speaker 1: Air Force has been launching the X thirty seven B,
Speaker 1: a mysterious and robotic miniature version of the Space Shuttle
Speaker 1: and the Space for years. On orbit, the X thirty
Speaker 1: seven B spends hundreds of days at a time performing
Speaker 1: classified experiments. According to the magazine The National Interest, that
Speaker 1: research includes developing a new type of high efficiency propulsion
Speaker 1: system that could allow spacecraft to say an orbit longer
Speaker 1: and to maneuver in between orbits with agility. In the
Speaker 1: event of a future war in orbital space, US controlled
Speaker 1: drones similar to the X thirty seven B might rapidly
Speaker 1: replace military satellites attacked by an enemy, or presumably to
Speaker 1: counterattack the enemy's satellites. If that sounds like a scenario
Speaker 1: out of a Tom Clancy novel, guess again. We're talking
Speaker 1: about reality here, as the United States is preparing for
Speaker 1: the future of combat. In a January speech, General John Heighten,
Speaker 1: leader of the U. S. Strategic Command warned that Russia
Speaker 1: possesses anti satellite weapons and that China has been hard
Speaker 1: at work on developing them as well. He said, in
Speaker 1: the not too distant future, they will be able to
Speaker 1: use that capability to threaten every spacecraft we have in space.
Speaker 1: We have to prevent that, and the best way to
Speaker 1: prevent war is to be prepared for war. For decades,
Speaker 1: U S military efforts in space have been run by
Speaker 1: the Air Forces Space Command, which heightened headed from twenty
Speaker 1: fourteen to twenty sixteen, but some think the job of
Speaker 1: protecting U. S interests in orbital space is so important
Speaker 1: that a special, separate branch of the military ought to
Speaker 1: be created to do it. In a recent essay, M. V.
Speaker 1: Coyote Smith, a retired Air Force colonel who is now
Speaker 1: a professor of Strategic Space studies at the Pentagons Air University,
Speaker 1: argues for the creation of a U. S Space Corps,
Speaker 1: especially when considering the needs of potential future space war.
Speaker 1: The former space weapons officer argues that operating an orbit
Speaker 1: requires a different mindset from the rest of what the
Speaker 1: Air Force does, and that space activities will never receive
Speaker 1: the funding or resources they need if they remain a
Speaker 1: part of another service, a separate space where, he writes,
Speaker 1: but have the freedom to develop the best thinking on
Speaker 1: space operations. Smith believes it would also be better equipped
Speaker 1: to provide advice to the President and combat commanders, and
Speaker 1: to make an independent case to Congress for funding. Smith
Speaker 1: didn't respond to request for comment, but he's not the
Speaker 1: first to argue that a special space service is needed.
Speaker 1: A few examples back in former U S Senator Bob Smith,
Speaker 1: a Republican from New Hampshire, advocated for a separate space Corps,
Speaker 1: and an Air War College paper published in two thousand
Speaker 1: draws a parallel between the current need for space corps
Speaker 1: to the post World War One efforts of General William
Speaker 1: Billy Mitchell to get Congress to fund strategic air power development.
Speaker 1: A two thousand six article in The Space Review also
Speaker 1: advocates for an independent space force, saying the officers whose
Speaker 1: formative experiences came from flying planes in Earth's atmosphere cannot
Speaker 1: be expected to instinctively understand the nature of space warfare.
Speaker 1: Another argument for having a separate space Corps is that
Speaker 1: the Air Force already is trying to do too many things.
Speaker 1: From operating satellites to wage electronic warfare, and then it
Speaker 1: gives short thrift to anything that doesn't involve flying airplanes.
Speaker 1: Joan Johnson Freeze, a national security affairs professor at the U. S.
Speaker 1: Naval War College who focuses on space security issues, said
Speaker 1: this the Air Force went from being an air force
Speaker 1: to an air in space force, to an aerospace force
Speaker 1: to an airspace and cyber force, with jet jockeys still
Speaker 1: getting the lion's share of top air Force positions. General
Speaker 1: Heighten has gone a long way, but he's still not
Speaker 1: Air Force Chief of Staff. Until there is a separate
Speaker 1: Space force, air force culture won't change, and fire pilots
Speaker 1: will still rule. The current Space Commands budget, of roughly
Speaker 1: nine billion dollars in annual funding, is a small slice
Speaker 1: of the Pentagon's overall five eighty billion dollar budget. The
Speaker 1: idea of a US Space Corps conjures up a mental
Speaker 1: image of astronauts strapped into space fighters armed with laser beams,
Speaker 1: But as Smith's notes in his essay, the current Space
Speaker 1: Command is different from the rest of the Air Force
Speaker 1: because flying is in its mission. It's earthbound personnel law
Speaker 1: uch and supervise satellites even so he writes its units
Speaker 1: are organized in the squadrons, units and wings that even
Speaker 1: borrow patches and logos from famous aviation units. He thinks
Speaker 1: that conveys the wrong message that the Air Force and
Speaker 1: his words, does not value space space power or its
Speaker 1: space professionals. In Smith's vision, the Space Corps would not
Speaker 1: only support terrestrial military efforts, but in some situations would
Speaker 1: take the lead and the event of attack against US satellites.
Speaker 1: For example, the Space Court commander might direct other services
Speaker 1: to attack targets on Earth in order to thwart the
Speaker 1: space attackers. He also sees acting as sort of an
Speaker 1: orbital police force, which would protect commercial US space industry
Speaker 1: and ensure that, as he says, all awful and non
Speaker 1: hostile actors enjoy the full benefits of space faring, regardless
Speaker 1: of national origin. He would be up to Congress to
Speaker 1: create a separate military arm and it's unclear how much
Speaker 1: support the concept would have, but President Trump is pushing
Speaker 1: for a big boost in defense spending, including spending more
Speaker 1: to develop both defensive and offensive space weapons, so creation
Speaker 1: of an orbital force conceivably could become part of the debate.
Speaker 1: That's our show for this week. Thank you so much
Speaker 1: for tuning in. Further thanks to our audio producers Dylan
Speaker 1: Fagin and Noel Brown, and our editorial Liaison's Christopher Hasiotis
Speaker 1: and Alison Loudermilk. Subscribed to now Now for more of
Speaker 1: the latest science news and send us links to anything
Speaker 1: you'd like to hear his cover. Plus, do you think
Speaker 1: military should develop space presences? Let us know You can
Speaker 1: send us an email. Now podcast at has stuff works
Speaker 1: dot com, and of course, for lots more stories like these,
Speaker 1: head on over to our home planet now dot ho
Speaker 1: stuff works dot com.