Friday Funny: Fish are no longer depressed in the ocean thanks to Prozac

Earlier this week, The New York Times had a story about fish and depression. Apparently, it’s a thing because… Science!

“The neurochemistry is so similar that it’s scary,” said Julian Pittman, a professor at the Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences at Troy University in Alabama, where he is working to develop new medications to treat depression, with the help of tiny zebrafish. We tend to think of them as simple organisms, “but there is a lot we don’t give fish credit for.”

Gosh.

Well there’s good news, apparently thanks to the depression treatments of higher animals, including homo sapiens and their pets, the ocean is being flooded with Prozac. Oh, wait, that’s bad for crabs according to Portand State University:

Prozac in ocean water a possible threat to sea life, PSU study finds

(Portland, Ore.) October 17, 2017 – Oregon shore crabs exhibit risky behavior when they’re exposed to the antidepressant Prozac, making it easier for predators to catch them, according to a new study from Portland State University (PSU).

The study, published in the journal Ecology and Evolution, illustrates how concentrations of pharmaceuticals found in the environment could pose a risk to animal survival.

For years, tests of seawater near areas of human habitation have shown trace levels of everything from caffeine to prescription medicines. The chemicals are flushed from homes or medical facilities, go into the sewage system, and eventually make their way to the ocean.

In a laboratory, the PSU team exposed Oregon shore crabs to traces of fluoxetine, the active ingredient in Prozac. They found that the crabs increased their foraging behavior, showing less concern for predators than they normally would. They even did so during the day, when they would normally be in hiding.

They also fought more with members of their own species, often either killing their foe or getting killed in the process.

“The changes we observed in their behaviors may mean that crabs living in harbors and estuaries contaminated with fluoxetine are at greater risk of predation and mortality,” said researcher Elise Granek, a professor in PSU’s department of Environmental Sciences and Management.

###

Ah well, due to all that Prozac at least the fish will be happier, and the crabs will remain…crabby.

Advertisements

121 thoughts on “Friday Funny: Fish are no longer depressed in the ocean thanks to Prozac

  1. Well, at least we know Prozac works to increase the self esteem and self confidence of the crabs in Portland, Or. Soon, they’ll be having awards ceremonies and give out participation trophies.

    • Or it could be making them suicidal. They simply pretend to be eating but in reality they are approaching the predators and boldly saying EAT ME

    • But doesn’t the increased availability of crabs help the survival/life of their predators? Doesn’t anybody care about their well being?

    • While it may seem amusing to poke fun at such ground-breaking research, the leakage of pharmaceuticals into the ocean waters may reflect an existential threat to many of the higher forms of sea life we cherish. Just imagine the potential carnage of all those whales caught up in fishing nets due to overexposure to Viagra, Cialis and similar recreational drugs.

      • Article stated these crabs were dosed with the chemical in the laboratory. GUARANTEED that dose was many orders of magnitude higher than anything that could possibly exist in the OCEAN, for Pete’s sake.
        Parts per billion? Parts per TRILLION? Even measurable? Where? It matters. And measured by whom?Where has a concentration of Prozac been measured IN THE OPEN OCEAN that could affect the behavior of wildlife? (Crickets, of course!)

        This was the junkiest possible “junk science” just to create an alarmist headline, nothing more. Yes, we SHOULD address residual pharmaceuticals in waste water, but headlines like this, and experiments that sound like they were done by a fifth-grader, are not helpful. And I sure as hell hope my tax dollars didn’t pay for it!

  2. If Prozac will help me catch more crabs in Newport Bay, then I’ll load up on the stuff and put pills in the pots.

    Zebra fish are widely used for genetic studies.

    • We recently bought about $200 of oysters, clams and crabs at Nehalem Jetty Fishery for a birthday celebration. Delicious!

      I was amused by their description of the use of a clam-gun.

    • If crabs are like lobsters, the way to catch more crabs is to use more baited pots. It was discovered that lobsters are not actually trapped, but farmed. Sixty percent of the diet of lobsters captured in the traps was found to consist of the bait used to lure them into the traps. The lobsters just go in and out of the traps eating the bait, until they are unlucky enough to be in the trap as it is pulled from the water after being big enough to harvest or actually get to big to get back out.

      More baited traps equals more food for lobsters and more food for lobsters equals more lobsters.

  3. A bit more plausible than homeopathy, but not much. Apparently, by this claim, any detectable level of an evil chemical will have an effect (and the sort of effect it has in humans in a vastly higher dose).
    A lesson from Nixon’s War on Cancer is to not let zealots near a lab capable of detecting to parts per billion.

    • As a grunt in that war, I learned some important lessons.

      Life science wasn’t yet then sufficiently advanced for money thrown at it to reap any rewards.

      Climate science is even more in its infancy now than was life science then.

    • Today we can detect very low levels of chemicals, and detection methods keep improving. But you have to know what chemical you are looking for. Most plants produce toxins as a defense mechanism. We don’t know these toxins, so we can’t detect them yet. Organic produce is guaranteed to contain only natural toxins.

    • A detectable level of a chemical is a moving target. Methods keep improving – but you have to specify the chemical, not its effects. Plants create natural but mostly unidentified toxins as a defense mechanism. An “Organic” label means that your produce contains only natural toxins.

    • Don’t forget though dosages are determined by the weight of the patient. Those widdle fishies only weigh about 1/100 or 1/500 of what we weigh so a dosage diluted to 1/500 is still the same as we take given their weight

      • Nope, that is not how it works. The last part of your post is wrong. You are mixing up dosage and concentration. If you have to take 10 ml of cough syrup in order for it to be effective and you diluted it to 1/500 then you have to take 5 litres of that dilution to receive the same amount of active substance as 10 ml of concentrated syrup.

        Fluoxetine, or any drug that works by interacting to receptors for that matter, is only active if it reaches certain concentration in the target tissue. Let’s suppose that the concentration of fluoxetine in the brain has to be 1 micromolar or higher to be active as an antidepressant. If the concentration on sea water is 1 picomolar, (1000 times lower) fluoxetine is not going to be active no matter how big or small the animal is. Unless there is a very efficient way of accumulating fluoxetine in the body, not discovered yet. In fact, the opposite happens, fluoxetine is metabolized in the liver, excreted and degraded.

      • We recently bought about $200 of oysters, clams and crabs at Nehalem Jetty Fishery for a birthday celebration. Delicious!

        I was amused by their description of the use of a clam-gun.

      • Pharmaceuticals must also find an effective active site in the organism. It is not simple inorganic dilution. The organism has a low chance of encountering ONE molecule of a waste pharmaceutical, then that one molecule must trigger an active site.

      • In this case, since the dose is in the water the fish is taking in, size of the fish doesn’t matter. A bigger fish will process more water and hence absorb more of the chemical.

    • You are right Tom. Starting with the unwritten presumption fluoxetine passing through the body unchanged. European Medicines Agency disagrees. So does Forensic Medicine, Medical Academy, Bydgoszcz, after concluding fluoxetine stable in biological material stored at +4°C and +25°C for a period of only one month.

      Naturally this didn’t prevent EPA detecting fluoxetine in Mississippi sediment, but in only one sample, at 1.26 ng/g. But not norfluoxetine, a major degradation product/metabolite, in any sample. EPA detected norfluoxetine in Mississippi water, which is remarkable taking into consideration it is practically insolubility in water (<9.51e-05 mol/L).

    • Spot on. Prozac is odd too in that it inhibits the enzyme pathway which metabolizes Prozac itself!!! CYP 2D6..it takes weeks of dosing to achieve therapeutic levels in plasma.

  4. fluoxetine, the active ingredient in Prozac…………
    ………..They also fought more with members of their own species,

    another side effect is suicidal thoughts

      • Soon to be headlines in NYT … Maniac crabs on Prozac assault beaches maiming thousands. Kelp Triffids on Prosaic assault west coast of California. CO2 attacks mid-west states. Run for your life but there is nowhere to go!

    • Aren’t suicidal/homicidal thoughts generally considered signs of depression? I would think Tim Halla’s idea of manic behavior would be more likely.

      • The definition of type II rather than type I bipolar is the subject only being manic on antidepressants in type II.. The effect will sometimes change radically depending on the state of the person’s bipolar syndrome.

  5. “In a laboratory, the PSU team exposed Oregon shore crabs to traces of fluoxetine, the active ingredient in Prozac. They found that the crabs increased their foraging behavior, showing less concern for predators than they normally would. They even did so during the day, when they would normally be in hiding.

    They also fought more with members of their own species, often either killing their foe or getting killed in the process….Crabs more crabby….”

    Well how crabby do you think the crabs who are not on drugs but are paying for rehab, addiction, treatments, crimes, accidents, bad schools and stupid voters on drugs? The control group of crabs: far more crabby.


    “These are sharp you know.”

    • Correction: “Well how crabby do you think the crabs are who are not on drugs but are paying for…”

      and should include but not be limited to:

      higher insurance rates, poorer quality employees, increased use of food stamps, targeted demographics, and a corrupted worthless FDA which is an arm of the multi-billion dollar psychotropics industry.

  6. It’s all over folks. It isn’t going to be possible to scrape these endemic nut jobs out of academia whilst leaving some sort of structure intact. We are literally deep into a new Dark Age and hoping against hope for some kind of Renaissance.

    • Progressive socialist academics are like drug dealers, there are always many candidates to replace those taken out of action. Besides, they both claim to be able to cure everyone’s miseries.

    • Most of this drivel that masquerades as science in today’s academia would wither and die if the US government NSF/NIH grant pool were reduced by 90%.
      Dr. Richard Lindzen has proposed just such a remedy to clean out the climate change swamp critters. But all of biology snd rcology sciences would long-term benefit also from such a pruning.

      • Right on!

        Just one of the many needed reforms which the Trump administration has so far not done.

        I am deeply disappointed, but not so much that I’ve stopped contributing.

  7. Show less concern for predators but fight more with other crabs…seems like a conflict to me, logically.

  8. I certainly understand the entertainment value, but there’s more to it, and I believe if you hear me out, you might get where I’m coming from.
    We have a mega flaw in the waste water treatment plants. They do not remove these chemicals, and if you think about how much of this and nutrients are getting through the system. Think about the other elicit drugs like crack. That was one of the first tip offs. A PD in the US started tracking drug houses using the sewerage system, with pin point accuracy. Estrogens, triclosan, and all kinds of stuff.
    You get the drift.
    This is where your ears should perk up.
    All the hysteria about climate change and eel grass being destroyed by it, is masking the real problem with the same symptoms, and the source is being ignored. Same with oysters, and clams.
    I get very pissed off listening to Senator Whitehouse rambling on about fairy tales, while the bays, and those that depend on them get ruined.

  9. The point of the story is that people from Portland State University are a danger to Oregon shore crabs.

  10. With the rampant TDS epidemic, Xanax sales are exploding.

    “Prozac Nation Is Now the United States of Xanax”

    Best line from article:
    “Every generation, going back to Periclean Greece, to second century Rome, to the Enlightenment, to the Georgians and to the Victorians, believes itself to be the most anxious age ever,” Mr. Stossel said.

  11. “Oregon shore crabs exhibit risky behavior when they’re exposed to the antidepressant Prozac, making it easier for predators to catch them, according to a new study from Portland State University (PSU).”

    It is because prozac can lead to suicidal ideation. Had the shore crab bothered to read the black box warning on the label they would know that.

  12. Wait… what? Am I to understand that crabs get high on Prozac and when it wears off, they get depressed? And sometimes have fights and zonk each other?

    And zebrafish – what about the zebrafish? Did anyone test Nemo (clownfish) to see if he had a reaction, adverse or other wise, to prozac?

    Would that work on my hissy feral kitty? She has mood swings and back spasms and thinks my shoes are attacking her.

    I’m am constantly amazed at the sheer stupidity of these studies. Maybe the fact that we are not gill breathers escaped the researchers.

  13. Somehow …. I think the probability of a crab ending up on my plate served up with a side of butter is a greater threat to the crabs than Prozac.

  14. “For years, tests of seawater near areas of human habitation have shown trace levels of everything from caffeine to prescription medicines.”

    Let’s rewrite that statement so as to subject it to reasonable sanity:
    For years, tests of seawater near areas of human habitation have shown the same trace levels of human habitation expected of any area near to where human habitation occurs.

    • Like that groundbreaking study a few years ago finding that people living in dense urban areas are exposed to more air pollution than their country cousins.

  15. “They also fought more with members of their own species, often either killing their foe or getting killed in the process.”

    Similar to the effects of Prozac and other antidepressants in humans, if you investigate late
    Twentieth and early Twenty-first Century mass murders thoroughly. Thanks to psychiatry and Big Pharma, big profit-makers backed by phony science.

    • Prozac side effects are also due to the wide range of metabolic clearance rates. Above I mentioned this drug is not only depedependent on CYP2D6 enzyme for primary metabolic clearance, the drug INHIBITS this enzyme!!! The range of CYP2D6 activity in the population falls between extensive metabolizer to complete inhibited. About 5% of the population lacks any level and become toxic after a few days.
      This same enzyme converts hydrocodone to hydromorphone, a much more powerful opioid..this is why we have a national opioid problem. Simple genetic testing would make these problems go away. Along with those on Prozac flushing it down the drain and supposedly poisoning fishes and lower life forms.

  16. I love the precise jargon of rigorous science – “It’s scary!” He’s obviously pandering for tenure.

  17. Another study that involves trips to ocean resorts…

    “For years, tests of seawater near areas of human habitation have shown trace levels of everything from caffeine to prescription medicines. The chemicals are flushed from homes or medical facilities, go into the sewage system, and eventually make their way to the ocean.”

    From “trace levels” of a random list of substances to constant levels of Prozac throughout ports, estuaries and bays. Gross assumptions leading to gross assumptions.

    Yet, no lists of actual measurements of their chosen medications’ in ocean waters.

    Must be too obvious hat way.

    Sounds like party school PSU students just wanted easy access to anti-depressants and other “medications”. along with trips to the beaches.

    Or they have certain tooth paste snake oil alarmists for teachers…

  18. That explains why I feel soooo much more relaxed, after a long, leisurely snorkel around a salt water reef!

  19. Those pesky little Oregon shore crabs can see ionizing radiation, too:
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/17630377_The_visual_response_of_the_purple_shore_crab_Hemigrapsus_nudus_to_ionizing_and_non-ionizing_radiations
    I didn’t check the crabs for meds, though. Prozak was developed in 1974, three years after I did the research. To confound the PSU research, crabs have access to their own version of happy pills:
    https://www.anxiety.org/five-foods-that-make-you-happy-seaweed

  20. Very usefull study for the Trump administration.
    As a showcase of junkscience to be slashed from the future budgets. As any academic drivel affixed with the mention “environmental science”.

  21. But it truly is similar (the neurochemistry is). I find nothing funny abut it. Everybody having nerves uses the same chemistry and has homologous receptors. Human drugs target those receptors and are routinely tested in fruit flies. If flies can have schizophrenia, why does the idea of depression in fish seem funny? I have kept fish; I can tell a depressed one from a happy one.

    The other part of it — that traces of drugs in the environment pose any risk to anyone — is malevolently mendacious. So not funny either.

    • A schizophrenic fruit fly?
      Where did the psychologist find a couch small enough for the fly to lay down?
      What do do they use for fish? A conch?

      • The one I know is not a psychologist, he is a geneticist, but I am sure he did provide his flies with a couch at some point. Take a listen to Doug Armstrong (there are many others who can tell a similar story; this is just a good entry point and a showcase for neurobiology):

        Schizophrenia is a heritable disease — not exactly a boon for a psychotherapist.

      • You mean formaline but only after the behaviour was recorded and specimen dead. ;)

        I’m sure I’d rather take my crab with vodka.

      • If one out of 20 uses fluoxetine 20 mg a day, and 2000 ug of that is excreted in urine, 60 m³ water is spoiled with 30 ng/l. That means all the sewage water that the 20 people create together is contaminated with more than the 30 ug/m³. Then it is diluted so that each Prozac 20 mg user at some point downstream contaminates 60 cubic meters of water (0.008 acre fathoms).

        I find this interesting, slightly funny, and something to think about, but not to be scared about.

      • Why wouldn’t it be valid? It’s low but not impossible, and the results are statistically significant.

        This is not good enough for an ig nobel, but maybe good enough to re-estimate the amount of need for fluoxetine medication.

      • Why wouldn’t it be valid?

        Fluoxetine gets metabolised. How would crab get exposed to it? The study premises seem therefore questionable. In addition, LC50 values in literature (about 0.8 mg/L in crustaceans) are orders of magnitude higher than the figure you quoted. It’s still astonishingly low compared to >240 mg/kg bw in rodents.

      • Fluoxetine does not get fully metabolized. It can be found in sewage. Check google scholar. If human patient intake is 20,000,000 ng/day, you get lots of 30ng/l water even if 90% does get metabolized.

        We are not talking about toxicity LC50 either, but about behavioral changes that lead to predation.

        The crab Prozacced just doesn’t mind the predators. Funny that.

      • What really gets funny now is the association one can make (if not on data then on the obvious intent) between this study and this other one:

        https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/08/170814162334.htm

        Having read that, I immediately suggested a follow-up study that would surely be a heavy-hitter: give oxytocin to policemen, security guards on duty, and to infantrymen in combat, and see how their behavior will change. I predict they will be less xenophobic, among other things.

      • You are free to believe in the study if you like Hugs. I remain skeptical and convinced patients should have freedom to choose medicating (or not) their own disabling disease, irrespective of atmospheric/oceanic composition CACA, homeopathic, misanthropic and other similar faiths.

      • Gene October 21, 2017 at 11:21 am

        Clearly you have never put your cherry a$$ on the line or in a tactical stack if you imagine that experimenting with soldiers by giving them oxytocin in combat is somehow a good idea.

        I can’t even begin to describe to you the utter contempt I have for a subhuman such as yourself worse than worthless, miserable existence. Good men have died so that you have the right to spew such antihuman garbage.

      • I do not think it is a good idea; neither do I think it was a good idea to give oxytocin to the citizens of the civilized world hoping that it will make them more receptive to paying for the rope that will be used to hang them.

        The civilized world is full of bad ideas.

      • Jaakko,

        It’s not as if I’d believe or know. There’s a study with results. Sometimes the results don’t hold. I just don’t see why they should not. This is not homeopathy. I’m neither specialist on the fluoxetine metabolism, so, it is hard to state anything with a high certainty. OTOH, I can confidently say neither are you. A little bit of humbleness does good here. The assumption should be a research paper published in a respected paper is, well, respected and its authors are professional researchers, of course.

        This is just a rule of thumb, but sometimes it appears if people rather follow their first intuition than give the benefit of doubt to themselves. It leads to hubris in areas they are not professionals. I’m not an expert here, so I’ll shut up now.

        What the policy will be should not be left to ‘crabologists.

  22. (Serious) Question: Is Prozac addictive?

    What I’m really asking is whether there actually is any active ingredient in there?
    Because if there was and due to its ‘activity’ on the intended brain chemistry, it would be addictive.
    There would be Prozac Junkies prowling the streets looking for their next fix.
    (The wicked side of me says, ‘thank fook they’re all still confined inside science labs, or somewhere, ANY where!)

    Anybody and everybody with actual experience of the stuff knows its only effect is due to the Placebo Effect – hence why it comes in endlessly changing and multicoloured pills and or capsules. Getting and opening a new prescription every month is just like Christmas.

    That some people do derive actual benefit (let’s have some empathy here) is a damn good reason that clowns like this should keep their faces shut. Not only is he a clown, he is a Bad Clown

    Those of us with extensive life knowledge will recognise a rather pathetic attempt to attract a mate, via the supposedly desirable characteristics of ‘being ‘sensitive and caring’
    The guy’s dumbness goes exponential when he cannot see the soaring divorce rates and dearth of babies in the Western World.
    The girls ain’t buying – they have empathy (genetically) built in and can see a fraud coming from a million miles away

    • No it is not addictive. Addictive molecules work on dopamine. Fluoxetine is a serotinergic agent.

      PETA …. granted, there is quite a large placebo effect in this area, but you would be wrong to assume that antidepressants have no effect above placebo. Just sayin.

  23. Being an Aquarist for decades, I hate the fact that Fish can be tortured in experiements.

    “The neurochemistry is so similar that it’s scary,” said Julian Pittman, a professor at the Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences at Troy University in Alabama, where he is working to develop new medications to treat depression, with the help of tiny zebrafish. We tend to think of them as simple organisms”,

    “but there is a lot we don’t give fish credit for.”

    Says that then proceeds to turture zebra fish.

    medication for depression does as much harm or more than it helps. I have seen this first hand. Depresion medication makes people more instable in many cases, and even causes them to kill themselves

    Plus diagnosis, being unhappy with a life you short changed yourself on is called “depression”. The answer is to change your life for the better, not take pills. Well over 50% of people who are given these meds don’t need them, psychologists diagnose as depression far too readily.

    There is of course clinical depression, a chemical imbalance in the brain, which is a different matter of course and many do need some medication, but the vast majority just need a kick up the arse, not medications.

    How on earth did we make it through some of the worst periods of human history without depression meds one might wonder.

    The fact we are sensitised, not desensitised, is why this phonema is as it is.

  24. Physchologists, most of these hacks promote mental weakness and therefore provide the need for psychologists

  25. You really couldn’t make this stupidity up and it is actually terrifying and a descent into a culture that makes the Dark Ages seem like a era of rational conduct. SMC’s link to the insane hoemopathy story shows there are people even crazier than the members of the green cargo cult.
    How is this going to ever be stopped? Now I need some Prozac, it’s just too depressing.

  26. Maybe it is really antidepression drugs that are responsible for the climate change that we have been experiencing. I am sure that it is possible to modify one of the popular climate simulations to show that such is the case. Maybe decreasing the use of such drugs can stop our global climate from changing.

  27. So does it follow that people on Prozac are at more risk of predation and mortality? After all, if the biology is so similar??

    Now that science can’t tell the difference between a guppy and girl, I fear to visit any doctor who graduated in the last decade. The next generation need not worry about climate change—just stay away from the researcher and doctor that thinks you’re equivalent to a guppy as far as biology goes. You may end up being fed guppy food and given clean water in your tank. Science is most certainly dead at this point.

  28. Non-Human Toxicity Excerpts
    ANIMALS SHOWED MILD STIMULATION FOLLOWED BY DEPRESSION, TWITCHING, SPASTIC CONVULSIONS, ATAXIA, HINDLIMB PARALYSIS & SLOWED RESPIRATIONS.
    Gosselin, R.E., H.C. Hodge, R.P. Smith, and M.N. Gleason. Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products. 4th ed. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1976., p. II-154
    from HSDB
    Non-Human Toxicity Values
    LD50 Rat oral 2426 mg/kg
    Lewis, R.J. Sax’s Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials. 9th ed. Volumes 1-3. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1996., p. 2600
    from HSDB
    LD50 Rat ip 819 mg/kg
    Lewis, R.J. Sax’s Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials. 9th ed. Volumes 1-3. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1996., p. 2600
    from HSDB
    LD50 Mouse oral 2490 mg/kg
    Lewis, R.J. Sax’s Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials. 9th ed. Volumes 1-3. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1996., p. 2600
    from HSDB

    From here:
    https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/6850741#section=Non-Human-Toxicity-Excerpts
    Of course, this isn’t about fluoxetine. It’s about peppermint oil.
    Please be careful which flavor “Climate Toothpaste” you choose!
    (You might also want to lay off the peppermint patties.8-)

  29. The DEA has used bulk testing from area neighbourhood sewers to identify high drug use rates such as opioids, meth and cocaine etc, that is excreted via bodily wastes. While not specific to any household or individual, it does identify general communities at risk and provides a general level of general abuse of illegal substances. Cities downstream from other large cities also have some level of detectable elements of many substances, both legal and illegal in major river systems. It isn’t just in the oceans albeit oceans are diluted by many orders of magnitude than closer to the source such as a sewage outflow or lesser, a river system. This is why we want to think twice about drinking tap water in certain jurisdictions throughout the world, especially densely populated areas of earth utilizing river water directly. It all accumulates the further downstream you go, and city water purification doesn’t get all these trace substances out from raw river water. It may pass water standards for basic clean water, but many trace substances cannot all be filtered out mechanically or with other chemicals.

  30. Does this mean I should schedule psychotherapy for my cichlid? He’s been aggressive, and only leaves his cave to eat food!

  31. Troy U? Portland State?
    I suspect that, as is usually the case, these results are not statistically rigorous for several reasons:
    1) Insufficient sample size
    2) Not correcting for systematic errors
    3) Corrupted or insufficient controls
    4) Lack of double blinding (usually the experimenter is aware of the results he wants)
    5) Outright corruption (personal, philosophical, or grant money perversion (GMP)-see Eisenhower’s Dartmouth farewell speech)
    6) Lack of defined targets for the study defined BEORE the study begins (Endpoints pre-determination and subsequent evaluation to see if these are statistically corroborated)

    In the soft sciences, unlike the hard sciences, experimenters are often incapable of handling these scientific method operations, especially at doing 6). They run a “study” and find out what happens (open endpoints-this is a no-no) afterwards. It turns a study from objective to subjective.

    What is so difficult about the scientific method? Hypothesis-Experiment-Evaluate?

    Bub

  32. “They also fought more with members of their own species, often either killing their foe or getting killed in the process.”

    =======

    Some of the side effects of Prozac are diarrhea and headache. So if a crab has a headache and another crab is crapping on him that would be reason enough for a fight!

  33. Years ago I worked on the impact of pesticides on marine fish, especially larval fish. We ran into several problems. What could be demonstrated as causing mortality in the lab at extremely tiny levels could not be duplicated, not even close, in the wild. In the wild unless we knew specifically what we were looking for, original compound and metabolites, we just could not find it. We did ultimately demonstrate that drift of certain pesticides into a relatively pristine environment did cause mortality of several organisms, e.g., fiddler crabs. One problem with fish larvae often we had a higher mortality rate in the control than in the experiment. Still the environmentalists have been screaming about one chemical or another since Rachael Carlson. DDT didn’t ‘sterilize’ the world, nor did the far more toxic, although relatively short lived organophosphates and carbamates. Now in Europe and here it is the neonicotinoids. By the way, latest of honey bees at least, is that hive collapse is the result of a mite and improper control methods. There also may be a problem with the lack of genetic diversity in the queens being imported, apparently from Australia (?).

  34. I was under the impression that this site concerns climate science. I am a biotechnologist and as I read all the posts here I am reminded of the comment by Albert Einstein that the shoemaker should stick to his last.

  35. “I am a biotechnologist and as I read all the posts here I am reminded of the comment by Albert Einstein that the shoemaker should stick to his last.”

    And what is the “task” of the biotechs who are overdosing crabs with the active ingredient of prozak? It has the appearance of an environmental assault on our existing waste water systems so that gullible people accept the suggestion that they be replaced with something else.

    (Bill Gates wouldn’t happen to be selling environmentally sustainable sewage treatment plants, would he?)

    And the moral of the story is watch your municipal government and your waste water treatment plants, because I suspect this could get incredibly expensive and incredibly stupid, incredibly fast. And the other moral of the story is, Nike was just a start up company in the US (along with many even better shoe makers). Actually shoe making has an illustrious history in the US. It all started with a patent filed by an immigrant from SA for a machine that made shoes, and continued with the first plants in New England.

  36. Omni Processor – Wikipedia
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omni_Processor
    Omni Processor is a name proposed by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for a group of physical, biological or chemical treatment processes to process fecal sludge – a mixture of human excreta and water – in developing countries.

    Oh yes, here they come to a municipal government near you.

  37. In a laboratory, the PSU team exposed Oregon shore crabs to traces of fluoxetine, the active ingredient in Prozac. They found that the crabs increased their foraging behavior, showing less concern for predators than they normally would.

    But did they expose the predators to the same levels of fluoxetine?

  38. I’d be careful going in the water from now on….there is evidence Prozac turns a few otherwise harmless persons into mass murderers. Watch out for the homicidal crabs.

  39. Crabs on Prozac may be too confident – overestimating their strength and then falling prey to predators. C’mon. Visualizing crabs that are high made me… well, smile. I’d love to see such a sea-shore!

Comments are closed.