Psychology and the economy

There's no doubt that, due to the economic crisis, many people are experiencing psychological unrest. Some more than others, yet is there a gender divide? This NYT's article, "Why the Sting of Layoffs Can Be Sharper for Men," asserts that men are more hurt by being laid-off, as the male "ego" is more dependent on being a financial provider.
I'm not convinced, and am somewhat put off by the conclusions that this article makes. First of all, this only talks about homes in which there is a husband and wife, no mention is made of single women or mothers. Secondly, the primary evidence provided to show layoffs effect men more than women is the increase of males going to therapy. “Considering that women tend to seek psychiatric help more often that men, what I’m seeing is striking,”says Dr. Richard A. Friedman. Are the numbers of women going to therapy increasing as well? This isn't mentioned, and without a comparative analysis one can't conclude that more men are seeking therapy due to the economy than women. No doubt some of the issues the article discusses exist. I think there is a societal pressure for men to be the main financial providers, a stereotype which hurts both genders in the workforce. Yet it is an oversimplification to conclude that men are thus more psychologically affected by job-loss. As a fledgling psychologist, I find the leaps of logic in this analysis to be too great for such little evidence. Also, you loose me when you start to talk about the "Cinderella syndrome."

Social Darwinism Can Suck It!

(For best effect, imagine Tina Fey or Kathy Griffin announcing title)
This fascinating article reveals a side of Charles Darwin rarely talked about - that which detested slavery and rigorously pursued the idea of the common kinship of mankind. I mean, Darwin was an awesome guy (the ship he was on was called the Beagle. Who else was a beagle? Snoopy. Snoopy = Cool Joe, therefore, Darwin = Cool Joe, Q.E.D). "Darwin's Sacred Cause," a biography by Adrian Desmond and James Moore, describes how Darwin's hatred of slavery and desire for equality helped foster the scientific spirit that led him to become the "father of evolution" (to be clear, Russell Wallace was really the co-founder of evolutionary theory, but the poor guy gets so little publicity). I'm by no means an expert on Darwin's life, but it does seem likely that an engagement in social issues would be a strong motivation to seek the truth through science. In short, Darwin was one awesome scientific pioneer.
Also, February 12th is Darwin's 200th birthday! Props dude!

Acid in the Ocean, yum?

This isn't new news, but it's still important… As my biology professors emphasized, the ocean is like a giant wonderful sponge, soaking up extra CO2. But, there's no such thing as a free lunch. The way in which CO2 dissolves increases the acidity of the ocean. Many of our oceanic friends have calcium carbonate shells and skeletons, which are fragile and easily damaged. Why should we care? Just one example of sea-critters who are beneficial to humanity are cone snails (whose venom, deadly in the wild, can be used in the lab to treat chronic pain). Yet without the coral reefs to house them, many such unique and marvelous organisms will be gone.
Also, this might happen:

A slight exaggeration. Artwork by me.

Awesome Photos

Where can you look at photos of fossilized giant bird-poop, nano-dreadlocks, and animals who look like plants? In the NYT's science slide-shows! The photographic quality is beautiful, not to mention the science behind them. Here, take a look:

These are "Sea Squirts," who actually start of looking a lot like tadpoles. At one point in their development they grip onto the ocean floor and tranform into these tubular guys. I must say they look somewhat like alien-tubas.
Nanodreadlocks! Now even teeny tiny college students can "find an identity." Harvard scientists, notorious followers of Rastafarian culture, grew these nanobristles into hellical formations. I kid, but this is really neat stuff. Pictured are the nanofibers (yellow) wrapped around a very tiny polystyrene sphere (blue).

And, as promised, fossilized bird dookie. This actually is the…ahem… property of the giant moa, an extinct bird of massive porportions. Here he is on a post-stamp:

Then…
Now!

Emission Mission and the BEES!

With the U.S economy laying on the floor like a deflated balloon from that party a week ago, many are asking whether environmental issues should be put on the backburner until everything's sorted out.
The answer of many biologists (and me!) is an empathetic no. In fact, if there is a time to begin, it is most certainly now. What many policymakers and companies don't seem to grasp is the environment's hand in the economy. One example: No bees? Not only no honey, but no bee-powered pollination. No pollination? Egads our crops! Infact, the value of honey bees and native bees combined is estimated at over $19 billion smackeroos a year, in the USA alone! The value of insect pollination worldwide (mainly propelled by bees) is estimated at $217 billion! Yowzas! Those little guys are fuzzy flying lumps of gold.