Overnight in New York, an independent report was released which recommended a major overhaul of procedures and management of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

The report, undertaken by a 12 person team from the InterAcademy Council which represents the world’s major science academies, outlines some sweeping changes, such as the installation of an executive committee for the panel to give it stronger leadership, a “rigorous conflict of interest policy” for that leadership and more rigorous review processes to deal with “grey literature” – material from non peer-reviewed sources.

The report can be downloaded here. Videos of the press conferences held to launch the IAC report are available here.

The SMC sought comment from local climate scientists who have contributed to IPCC reports and/or represented New Zealand on the IPCC.

Further comments will be posted on the Science Media Centre website.

Professor Martin Manning, Director, Climate Change Research Institute, School of Government, VictoriaUniversity of Wellington comments:

“The InterAcademy Council (IAC) has run a detailed review of the process used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for assessing scientific understanding and this has produced a number of useful comments that I think most climate scientists will agree with.

“Their report accepts that scientific understanding of climate change is developing rapidly and this means that the process for assessing it for policymakers needs to become more dynamic.

“The IAC recommends a stronger management structure for the IPCC process and more emphasis on a broader communication strategy. That is important, however, it will require a higher level of support from governments, and so government responses to this review are now a key factor. The review has not fully recognised that the IPCC process is controlled by what governments formally agree to in plenary sessions each year, and that there have been instances when this has specifically limited a broader communication strategy.

“The open review process for the drafts of IPCC reports means that authors have to deal with an extremely large number of comments and the IAC has followed a recommendation that I, and probably others, made about the need for some screening of these comments by independent review editors to ensure that the authors can focus on the key questions.

“The IAC puts considerable emphasis on the need to cover uncertainty in this rapidly moving field of science. Their report includes a full copy of the Uncertainty Guidance note that was written for IPCC lead authors by me and two co-authors in 2005. Recommendations for more development in this area match similar comments made by others and steps have already been made to address these in an expert meeting held by the IPCC in July.

“However, those of us who have considered this issue in detail know that there are some fundamental differences in approaches to uncertainty in different scientific disciplines and so because the assessment has to be based on other scientific publications this is not quite as simple as the IAC suggests.

“The key points in this report are that governments should now reform the IPCC management structure and that assessment of the science does need to meet very high standards because climate change has major implications.”

Dr Andy Reisinger, Senior Research Fellow, New Zealand Climate Change Research Institute, VUW comments:

“The IAC review of the processes and procedures of the IPCC contains important recommendations for improving the management of this increasingly complex organisation. It also includes several suggestions to improve aspects of the IPCC’s processes that have already been discussed and in some cases even partially implemented, with various degress of success.

“The most important recommendation in my view is a step-change of the management of the IPCC by creating an Executive Committee, including a senior scientist to act as Executive Director of the Secretariat. Implementing this recommendation would be a significant departure from the current de-centralised model that the IPCC follows, where nearly all scientific work is carried out in the three Working Groups and its Task Force on Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Moving to a more centralised management structure would have clear advantages, such as improved coordination and better ability to respond to comments and criticism in a considered yet efficient way. It would also have some disadvantages though: one of the strengths of the IPCC in its current form lies exactly in its distributed organisation, which is one way of ensuring that its outputs cannot be hijacked by any particular viewpoint or individual. Placing more weight on central management will require considerably greater resources to ensure those management processes are up to expected standards. It will be up to governments to decide whether they are willing to provide such resources, and to consider carefully how the positive outcomes sought by such a change can be achieved without the negative consequences that it could entail.

“Similar considerations apply to suggestions for how to streamline the review process. Increased efficiency would come at the price of placing greater responsibility in the hands of fewer people, that is, the two or three Review Editors assigned to each chapter of the assessment reports. For such a change to work effectively, one would need to ensure that those relatively few people can and will carry out those tasks with the time dedication and expertise that is required to carefully vet thousands of review comments.

“Many of the other recommendations, such as increasing transparency of selection processes and the overall procedures of the IPCC, are well taken and I believe are already receiving attention by those in charge of the current assessment process. Some of the IAC’s minor recommendations, such as staggering of impacts assessments for sectors and regions, seem to me somewhat narrow and short-sighted, since it would increase the risk of internal inconsistencies. Such options have been discussed extensively by government representatives on the IPCC and participating scientists, and the implications of various alternative arrangements would require more careful attention than the IAC appears to have been able to give to those issues. But such options are of comparatively minor importance that hardly affect the main perceived or real challenges concerning the IPCC management.”

US research suggests children who were exposed to organophosphate pesticides while still in their mother’s womb were more likely to develop attention disorders years later.

Organophosphates have been linked to neurobehavioral deficits in children but this new research is the first to examine the influence of prenatal organophosphate exposure on the later development of attention problems.

The study, conducted among Mexican-American children living in the agricultural Salinas Valley in the US, found that prenatal levels of organophosphate metabolites were significantly linked to attention problems at age 5, with the effects apparently stronger among boys. The research is published today in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.

We approached toxicology experts for their views on the study and its significance.

Dr Ian Shaw, Professor of Toxicology, University of Canterbury comments:

“Organophosphorus pesticides (OPs) are designed to disrupt the nervous system – that’s how they kill insects, and therefore I am not at all surprised that they interfere with the development of the nervous system in the early stages of a child’s growth. As with many such findings the potential for a particular chemical to have some effect or another is suspected, but it takes a superb study like that just published by Amy Marks and her colleagues from Berkeley to provide strong evidence to link a chemical with an effect. The question is, what dose does a pregnant woman need to receive to result in neurological damage to her child? If it is low she could receive such a dose from residues of OPs in her food, if not this problem might only affect to woman in agricultural communities where their exposure to OPs would be greater, especially if they worked on farms during their pregnancy.”

—–

Our colleagues at the Australian SMC gathered the following comments:

Prof Chris Winder is Professor of toxicology and occupational health at the University of New South Wales:

“It has been known for many years that hyperactivity conditions can arise in children from chemical exposures, such as lead, tobacco smoke, phthalates, sodium benzoate, food dyes and some pesticides. Organophosphate pesticides are widely used in Australian agriculture, and all are known to be neurologically active. Most studies of developmental or reproductive effects of adverse exposures are complicated by establishing if exposure occurring during the critical periods of development in the first trimester or afterwards or even after birth. While this paper does not specify the period of exposure, it does make the point that it was prenatal. While development of the brain occurs early in pregnancy, its growth and differentiation continue throughout pregnancy and even after birth, as the complex interaction between brain and behaviour emerges. So it is not surprising that symptoms of pre-school ADHD arise in children known to be associated with pesticide exposure during the prenatal period. The paper also hints at gender and genetic background being factors.”

———–

Emeritus Professor Michael Moore is a toxicologist and former director of the National Research Centre for Environmental Toxicology at the University of Queensland:

“Outcomes are as might be expected excepting the gender variation at 5 (boys) which is unexplained. All of the co-variates seem to be covered, especially maternal education and exposures like smoking. Paternal influence does not seem to have been factored in. Mostly social science on a non-robust end point (ADHD). I was particularly struck by the high incidence of maternal depression (~50%) which could have an impact on infant behaviour. Since the study only looked at metabolites and there is evidence that those less able to metabolise (low PON1) have more neurodevelopmental delays, the study may under-represent the overall effects of exposure. None the less it does point to a likely outcome of exposure to neurotoxic agents during development.”

———–

Associate Professor Irina Pollard is Associate Professor of Biological Sciences at Macquarie University in Sydney:

“This paper is excellent but the findings are not a surprise. However, it’s good to see clear scientific data to reinforce and educate the general community about the use and abuse of synthetic chemicals – this publication acts as yet another instructive example. Many of the toxic effects of members of the organo-phosphate family rely on the fact that they are human-made synthetic hormone disruptors. Synthetic hormone disruptors, or xenohormones, are known to impair immune response, disrupt endocrine and reproductive function, including functional effects on the developing nervous system, and other adverse developmental effects. The organochlorine insecticides and a number of closely related hydrocarbons exhibit considerable estrogenic activity, so their adverse effects on fertility, early pregnancy and loss of function in the offspring, are not surprising. But to quantify the effects of prenatal environmental exposure to postnatal function against a continuum of confounding genetic and epigenetic factors is difficult because adverse effects on intellectual ability may take decades to be identified. I feel strongly that precautionary measures must be taken to minimize exposing children to xenohormones and other pollutants carrying long-term harmful consequences.”

The Science Media Centre sought comment from experts on the 60 Minutes piece Living Proof, which examined the story of Alan Smith, who was treated with intravenous doses of vitamin C while close to death suffering with the H1N1 virus and made a full recovery.

Professor John Fraser, Head of School of Medical Sciences, University of Auckland told the SMC:

“It is disappointing that the journalist did not attempt to seek expert advice on the reasons why the consultants were unwilling to administer high dose vitamin C. There is certainly no evidence from the medical literature that this treatment works particularly in severe cases of pneumonia.

“The consultants were quite right to resist the use of an unproven treatment, and to their credit they did acquiesce to accommodate the family’s wishes because they felt it would do no harm. In this remarkable case the patient did survive but there is no evidence that this was due to the vitamin C. This is a wonderful story of personal survival and it is sad that it has been used to discredit those professionals who were just trying to provide their best for a very sick patient. If the vitamin C had killed him, then the story would have been different. That is the risk of using an unproven treatment.”

Further comments will be posted to the SMC website.

The National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) faces a legal challenge by climate sceptics group the Climate Science Coalition which is taking the Crown Research Institute to court over the accuracy of its climate data.

UPDATED 2PM: In a statement of claim which the coalition says it has filed with the High Court at Auckland, it calls for the New Zealand temperature record collated and maintained by NIWA to be “set aside” and that NIWA be required to produce a “full and accurate” temperature record.

The Science Media Centre sought reaction from New Zealand scientists working in this area of research. Further comments will be added to the Science Media Centre website.

Professor Keith Hunter, pro-vice-chancellor, sciences, University of Otago comments:

“The suggestion that the NZ temperature record has been fraudulently manipulated by NIWA scientists to produce a non-existent warming trend is vexatious in the extreme because it implies not only that they have access to an independent and reliable temperature record which demonstrates that such a manipulation has occurred (which they do not), but also admissible evidence of the intention to commit fraud (which they do not). Thus it is nothing more than mud-slinging designed to confuse the public and smear the reputations of honest scientists. Honest debate and scepticism about science is one thing, but outright slander is quite different and this latest effort takes climate change denial to a new low. However, I have faith in the Auckland High Court being able to recognize this action for what it truly is.

“In addition, I understand that the coalition is now casting aspersions on the so-called “lack of peer review” of Jim Salinger’s PhD thesis which is at the genesis of the record. This is a false and baseless slur on the integrity of the awarding university and on the scientists who gave up their time to examine it and ensure that it met the high standards maintained by all NZ universities.”

Professor Martin Manning, Director, Climate Change Research Institute, School of Government, Victoria University of Wellington comments:

“If there was any reputable evidence that temperatures in New Zealand were not consistent with the long term global warming trend, that would be an important issue for scientists to understand. It would open up new areas for research and could have great potential value for New Zealand. But there is no such evidence and to suggest that scientists in NIWA would misrepresent this is completely illogical.”

Dr Glenn McGregor, Head of School of Environment at University of Auckland comments:

“I am uncertain what the CSC is hoping to achieve in taking NIWA to court to contest the authenticity and robustness of the NZ temperature record. In essence the CSC is accusing NIWA of scientific fraud and purposeful adjustment of the NZ’s temperature records. This couldn’t be further from the truth. Immense time and careful scientific effort has gone into the compilation and analysis of NZ’s temperature records. The CSC has drawn attention to the fact that temperature records that make up the composite NZ temperature series have been adjusted. No one in the climate science community denies this.

“There are very good scientific reasons, related to consistency of record, why climatologists make adjustments to “raw” temperature observations taken over long periods. Papers published based on the “adjusted” NZ record have been subject to stringent international peer review and there are insufficient grounds to contest the genuineness of this record. The CSC also touches on the relative warming observed in NZ compared to elsewhere. While warming across NZ may not have been as great as observed across Africa, the North America, Europe and Eurasia there are very good physical reasons for this that are clearly not understood by the CSC. Society is staring down the barrel of an uncertain climate future related to human induced climate change. In relation to this, the CSC’s attempt to contest the NZ temperature record and in doing so discredit an internationally respected government agency and its community of climate scientists and tie up key people in court proceedings is gratuitous.”

Dr Andy Reisinger, Senior Research Fellow, New Zealand Climate Change Research Institute, VUW comments:

“The High Court action against NIWA by the Climate Science Coalition has a distinctive Kafkaesque feeling to it. NIWA has diligently checked its temperature records, answered innumerable queries about them, and has validated the derived long-term warming trend from a range of different meteorological stations. All these carefully checked temperature records show a clear warming trend. That warming trend in New Zealand is consistent with the increase in global average temperatures, measured by thousands of meteorological stations around the world, including some very remote stations far from any direct human influence, and confirmed further by satellite observations, loss of glaciers, melting ice sheets, reduced frost days, extension of the growing season, increase in heat waves, etc.

“The Climate Science Coalition has not put forward any clear and consistent scientific arguments against this local or global temperature trend, has not published its views in scientific peer-reviewed journals, has not disclosed its own ’scientific’ methods by which it claims to show that there has been a cooling rather than warming, and its members have little credibility in the climate science community. But all this seems to be of little relevance: the High Court action will cost taxpayer money to defend the obvious against the obscure and ridiculous, and it will prevent New Zealand’s climate scientists from working on the issues that really matter, which is how to improve our understanding of the range of likely further climate changes and allowing New Zealand to take appropriate actions in response.

“One cannot help but think that this may be the real purpose behind this action by the Climate Science Coalition. Taking High Court action will neither advance the science of climate change nor public understanding of the issues at hand, but it will certainly steal productive time away from scientists that could have used that time either on further research or on publicly communicating what we already know about climate change and the reasons behind it.

“I have an extensive network of colleagues across the New Zealand scientific community engaged in climate research. I’m not aware of anybody in this community of active researchers who believes that the NIWA temperature records and warming trend derived from those records are substantially incorrect. Neither am I aware of any credible scientific publications that show otherwise. I’m not aware of any support from the active climate research community for Mr Leyland’s claims.”

Dr Dave Lowe, consultant LOWENZ Ltd. Renewable Energy and Climate Change Education and former NIWA climate scientist comments:

“To develop a thorough understanding of the science driving climate change takes decades of research and training. New Zealand climate change scientists employed by various Crown Research Institutes and Universities are amongst the best in the world and are internationally respected. Their research is continually scrutinised, peer reviewed and methods validated by independent research organisations world wide and this includes the techniques used to provide New Zealand temperature records.

“The Dominion Post reports that the NZ Climate Science coalition ‘wants NIWA to be ordered to produce another accurate record’ which does sound rather like …… I don’t like the answer you have provided so please give me another one that I will like. NIWA and other climate scientists in New Zealand are completely over worked and have already produced temperature records which satisfy stringent international peer review, are publicly available and these are apparently the data in dispute by the NZ Climate Science coalition.

“To avoid overworking the scientists further and save tax payers money, my suggestion is that the NZ Climate Science coalition should take the raw data used to produce the NZ temperature records (it is all publicly available) and work with it to produce the answer that they require. However their methods and results should then be subject to the same harsh international peer review and method validation processes as those undergone by the NIWA and other NZ climate scientists.”

I would support Dave Lowe’s suggestion.Further I would add that the vexatious action by the Climate Science Coalition appears to be motivated by the desire to spread doubt rather than to bring illumination or improve the quality of the NZ temperature record. It is strongly reminiscent of the remark let slip by the tobacco company Brown and Williamson, “Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with the ‘body of fact’ that exists in the mind of the general public.” At a time when the world is increasingly pressed to deal with extreme weather events on a number of continents and faces worse to come, the Coalition’s action does not win respect.

Ralph Sims, Professor of Sustainable Energy, Director, Centre for Energy Research, Massey University comments:

“Mr Bryan Leyland has considerable experience in energy engineering issues. He has written numerous articles on energy and climate change topics but he is not a climate scientist and I have yet to find a recent paper he has authored or co-authored on any related topic that has appeared in the recent peer-reviewed, scientific literature.

“In contrast many NIWA scientists have PhDs, respected international reputations, published widely in scientific journals, and have gained scientific credibility by their peers.

“The scientific debate on climate science must continue. Techniques, methods and instruments used in the past to measure climate temperature (and a wide range of other climate related changes) need to be continually improved to provide more accurate data and hence give a higher level of understanding of climate change and its possible impacts. This has been, and should always be, the case for any scientific knowledge as it advances and evolves. NIWA scientists are closely involved in this critical national and international debate. Their data has been widely published and is available for everyone to view.”So I have to wonder who or what is motivating Mr Leyland and the [Climate Science] Coalition to take legal proceedings. If they have a strong scientific argument as Mr Leyland is professing, why not simple submit a paper to a scientific journal in the usual manner and let the debate continue? Or is it that they simply want the publicity in order to keep their organization afloat?”

Euan Mason, Associate Professor, University of Canterbury:

“Peer review and publications in reputable scientific journals that set high standards are the best ways to debate scientific questions. If the court system was capable of the task then we would long since have adopted the legal system as the best way to advance knowledge. This legal suit is a nonsense designed to attract publicity and spread fear, uncertainty and doubt in the absence of a decent argument. The media should ignore it and the judge should throw it out. Let the “Climate Science Coalition” tender its own calculations and subject them to rigorous peer review by submitting a scientific paper.”

A gene that confers resistance to nearly all existing antibiotics has been found in bacteria in India, Pakistan and the UK, and appears to be spreading internationally as patients travel abroad to seek elective surgery, according to a study† published today in the journal Lancet Infectious Diseases.

The authors of the study say that the spread of the NDM-1 drug resistance gene is potentially a serious global public health problem. This is because bacteria with the gene are resistant to the class of antibiotics (known as carbapenems) reserved for emergency use against superbugs, and there are few new antibiotics in development that are likely to be effective against this type of resistance. They warn that the world may be entering a new era where antibiotics can no longer be relied upon to treat infections.

The research also suggests that NDM-1 positive bacteria have already become widespread in the environment in two of the communities sampled in India. With patients in Europe, the Americas, and Australasia increasingly opting to travel abroad for elective surgery (including cosmetic surgery), the researchers warn that the superbug may spread further quickly, and that concerted international surveillance efforts are required.

†“Emergence of a new antibiotic resistance mechanism in India, Pakistan, and the UK: a molecular, biological, and epidemiological study’, Walsh et al

Prof John Fraser, Head of School of Medicine, University of Auckland, comments:

“This is a significant finding that signals the development of a highly resistant gram negative organism that is essentially resistant to most known antibiotics, including the carbapenems used as a last resort for other antibiotic resistant strains. Particularly worrying is the implication by the authors that this strain has arisen and spread extremely rapidly across India and Pakistan and also in the UK, through the wide use of un-prescribed antibiotics which offers a strong selection for this organism. Equally worrying is how easily it has spread to the UK, which has a very large number of Pakistan and India immigrants.”

The following comments were gathered by our colleagues at the UK Science Media Centre.

Professor Kevin G Kerr, Consultant Microbiologist/Hon Clinical Professor of Microbiology, Harrogate District Hospital, said:

“This investigation highlights the size of the challenge we face in dealing with a new type of resistance in bacteria such as E. coli which are common causes of infection both in hospitals and in the community. The number of antibiotics we have left to treat these superbugs is rapidly diminishing and it is conceivable that we will soon see infections which are effectively untreatable. This report shows that the battle to control the emergence of antibiotic resistant superbugs through appropriate use of antibiotics must be fought at an international level.”

Professor Christopher Thomas, Professor of Molecular Genetics, University of Birmingham, said:

“This research illustrates the relentless evolution and spread of antibiotic resistance genes in bacteria which inevitably follows the development and use of new antibiotics in both clinical and community contexts. The rise of infections (eg urinary tract infections) by bacteria that normally are found in the gut (enteric bacteria) but can create severe problems in the old, infirm or those with weakened defences is partly a side product of advances elsewhere in medicine.

“It illustrates the importance of considering health issues as a world issue – how antibiotics are prescribed and controlled in one part of the world can very rapidly have consequences elsewhere. Understanding the medical, social and environmental factors that drive this evolution and spread should be a major priority to underpin the development of policies to minimise the threat.”

Professor Richard James, Director of the Centre for Healthcare Associated Infections, University of Nottingham, said:

“This work highlights that C.difficile and MRSA are not the only bacteria that can cause us serious harm. Bacteria that produce extended spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBLs) are resistant to the majority of antibiotics, with the possible exception of the carbapenems; this results in an increased therapeutic use of this class of antibiotics.

“This research describes the detection of the recently described NDM-1 ESBL in bacterial isolates obtained from patients in a number of locations in India and the UK. NDM-1 is the third type of carbapenemase, an ESBL that encodes resistance to carbapenems, that has been identified. NDM-1 was first detected in the UK in 2008 and has already become the predominant carbapenemase. At least 17 of the 29 UK patients infected by an NDM-1 producing bacteria had a history of travel to India. There is evidence of a link to the growing practice of medical tourism.

“The NDM-1 strains in the UK were largely unrelated to each other indicating that this ESBL resistance gene is capable of dissemination to a variety of pathogenic bacteria and thus constitutes a serious threat to healthcare systems. The detection of NDM-1 in the UK resulted in the release of a National Resistance Alert 3 notice by the Department of Health in 2009.”

The Deepwater Horizon oil spill appears to be largely over, with news that three quarters of the oil released during the approximately four months of the spill, has gone.

NOTE: Further comments added

The UK’s Food Standards Agency is investigating claims that milk from the offspring of a cloned cow is on sale in British supermarkets, according to a statement released overnight. European Union rules on novel foods ensure no products from clones’ offspring can be sold legally without a scientific assessment of safety.

People who suffer mental illness between 18 and 25 are more likely to experience a range of negative economic effects later in life, according to research from the University of Otago.

Studying 950 people born in Christchurch, researchers found that those who reported suffering from a psychiatric disorder (depression, anxiety disorder, substance dependence, etc) in early adulthood were, at age 30, less likely to be in in paid employment or working full time, were more likely to be receiving benefits, and were earning less money than people who had not experienced such disorders.

Further, the effects worsened as people experienced more than one such episode – as an example, people who had experienced four or more episodes of mental illness were four times more likely to be dependent on welfare benefits, worked on average 6 hours less per week, and earned over $150 dollars less per week, than those who not experienced psychiatric disorders.

The research also showed that the problem is a common one – just over half of those studied had experienced at least one psychiatric disorder between 18 and 25, and two thirds of these people had experienced two or more incidences of illness.

The research, say its authors, shows the importance of early, effective intervention, and that it’s not so much the type of illness, as its frequency, that is important.

The Science Media Centre approached local experts for comment on the paper’s implications. The research itself can be accessed in the SMC Resource Library.

Dr Marc Wilson, of the School of Psychology at Victoria University of Wellington, comments:

“While the question of lifespan impact of psychological problems is an international one, it’s great to see such an important contribution from close to home! While it’s pretty unsurprising that psychological problems during young adulthood can have an ongoing impact on subsequent wellbeing and life outcomes, there has been a question about whether this is due to the psychological problem itself, or the things that might in turn influence that psychological problem in the first place. For example, experiencing childhood abuse is associated with greater psychological problems in later life, and you could argue it’s the impact of that abuse that explains later-life underachievement rather than the psychological problem itself. Thanks to the Christchurch Health and Development Study, we can say that experiencing psychological problems during young adulthood is an important predictor of later-life problems (for example, poorer educational and workforce achievement), EVEN AFTER you take into account many of the things that are themselves predictors of later life problems. In fact, the more psychological problems experienced, the greater the underachievement.

“While the majority of people working in mental health would argue that here is not enough funding for mental health in general, this research emphasises something that shouldn’t be a surprise – even in a limited funding environment shouldn’t we be putting as much as we can into identifying at-risk adolescents and treating psychological issues BEFORE they become not just a problem for the individuals affected, but also the communities to which they belong? ”

Dr Daniel Shepherd, of the School of Public Health and Psychosocial Studies at AUT University, comments:

“Fergusson and collaborators have an enviable access to a world class dataset capable of impacting both health policy and practice. While much research has targeted health-related quality of life of individuals with psychiatric diagnoses, this study examines more objective outcomes such as employment and education. The design of their study affords an estimate of inequalities between those with, and those without psychiatric diagnoses, and between individuals with differing numbers of diagnoses. The authors have shunned over-complicated and unnecessary analyses to provide a clear picture of the relationship between psychiatric illness at one time point and negative life outcomes at another.

“This study will raise awareness of the prevalence of mental illness in New Zealand young adults, and the negative impacts of psychiatric illness, which hitherto have not been sufficiently disentangled from other confounding factors. A most important finding is the equality of disorder type (i.e., anxiety, depression, substance abuse) in predicting negative life outcome, and the greater impact of comorbidity / dual diagnosis. For me, this latter finding underlies the immense value of the paper, and begs the question as to how we change our current practices to more effectively treat those with multiple psychiatric diagnoses.

For more information, or to contact any of the experts above, contact the Science Media Centre on tel: 04 499 5476 or email: smc@sciencemediacentre.co.nz.

NIWA has published its climate outlook for the next three months:

“La Niña conditions for the rest of 2010″

The equatorial Pacific is now in a La Niña state, which is likely to continue until the end of the year.

Early spring temperatures look to be at, or just below, normal for much of the country, and cold snaps are still likely to occur.

Other than the lower half of the North Island, which will see below average rainfall, the rest of the country is likely to experience average rainfall.

Soil moisture is also likely to be near average for most of the country, with the West and East North Island likely to see some deviation from normal.

Sea level pressures are likely to be above normal near New Zealand.

Overall Picture

Temperature:

Early spring temperatures are likely to be near average or above average in all regions. However, short-term cold snaps and frosty periods typical of early spring will still occur. Sea surface temperatures are expected to be near average or above average around New Zealand over the August to October period.

Rainfall, soil moisture, and stream flows:

Rainfall is likely to be near normal in most places, but normal or below normal in the western North Island, and normal or above in the east of the North Island. Normal soil moisture levels and stream flows for August-October as a whole are likely in many regions, except for normal or below normal conditions in the west of the North Island, and normal or above normal soil moisture levels in the eastern North Island.

Regional predictions for the next three months:

Northland, Auckland, Waikato, Bay of Plenty:

Temperatures are equally likely to be in the above average or near average range.  Seasonal rainfall, soil moisture levels, and stream flows totals are likely to be near normal.

Central North Island, Taranaki, Wanganui, Manawatu and Wellington:
Temperatures are equally likely to be in the above average or near average range.  Seasonal rainfall totals, soil moisture levels, and stream flows are likely to be either normal or below normal.

Gisborne, Hawke’s Bay, Wairarapa:

Temperatures are equally likely to be in the above average or near average range.  Seasonal rainfall totals and soil moisture levels are likely to be either normal or above normal, while normal stream flows are likely.

Nelson, Marlborough, Buller:

Temperatures are equally likely to be in the above average or near average range.  Seasonal rainfall, soil moisture levels, and stream flows are likely to be near normal.

West Coast, Alps and Foothills, Inland Otago, Southland:

Temperatures are equally likely to be in the above average or near average range.  Seasonal rainfall soil moisture levels, and stream flows are likely to be near normal.

Coastal Canterbury, East Otago:

Temperatures are equally likely to be in the above average or near average range.  Seasonal rainfall, soil moisture levels, and stream flows are likely to be near normal.

Background

The tropical Pacific has moved steadily towards La Niña conditions over the past few months, and is now in a La Niña state.  La Niña conditions are likely to continue through the remainder of 2010.

Global stocks of phytoplankton — the foundation of the marine food web, and drivers of the ‘biological pump’ that sequesters carbon in the deep ocean — have been falling for last hundred years, according to a study published today in the journal Nature.

Phytoplankton bloom off New Zealand - seen by satellite. Image credit: NASA Earth Observatory/MODIS

The study suggests phytoplankton have declined by nearly 40 per cent since mid-century, most probably due to rising sea surface temperatures and changing ocean conditions. The research team combined modern satellite data with decades of historical shipboard records measuring underwater visibility (which decreases with higher concentrations of phytoplankton).

Boris Worm, marine biologist at Dalhousie University in Halifax and one of the paper’s authors, says that reduced phytoplankton growth adds a extra dimension — on par with ocean acidification, coral bleaching and overfishing — to the issues of climate and human activity-induced change faced by the marine environment.

Click here for links to global news coverage of this story.

Dr Philip Boyd,  National Institute for Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) Centre for Chemical & Physical Oceanography, University of Otago comments:

“This is the most detailed study to date, over the longest time period, on whether phytoplankton stocks are declining. As phytoplankton underpin the productivity of most marine ecosystems in our exclusive economic zone (EEZ), regionally and globally, the projected progressive decrease in stocks would have major and growing ramifications for the stocks of both farmed shellfish and wild fisheries.

“The regional analysis and comparison with indices of climate variability (such as El Nino) are perhaps the most valuable and compelling aspect of this study, and highlight how a changing climate will probably alter ocean productivity.

“However, although the authors provide compelling evidence – from meticulous statistical analysis – of a decline in stocks, at both a global and regional scale, over this period the annual changes they compute are small (1% of the global median). Also it must be borne in mind that chlorophyll is not a direct measure of phytoplankton stocks but an indirect one (a so-called proxy), and hence trends based on small annual changes in the concentration of a proxy must be treated with caution.”