Science & Environment

[spaminator]

California's San Andreas fault ripe for massive earthquake, study finds
Tectonic plate stress along San Andreas and San Jacinto fault lines at or above highest level in 1,000 years

Author of the article:Spiro Papuckoski
Published Jun 17, 2026 • Last updated 19 hours ago • 2 minute read

A landscape contorted by the San Andreas Fault is seen in the Mecca Hills on June 17, 2017 near Mecca, Calif.
A landscape contorted by the San Andreas Fault is seen in the Mecca Hills on June 17, 2017 near Mecca, Calif. Photo by David McNew / Files /Getty Images

Could Southern California be due for a massive earthquake in the not-too-distant future?


According to a study by earth scientists at the University of Hawai’i at Manoa, the tectonic plate stress along the San Andreas and San Jacinto fault lines in the state is at or above the highest level in 1,000 years.

California is bisected by the North American plate, which is generally moving in a southeasterly direction, and the Pacific plate, which shifts in a more northwesterly direction.

The fault stretches more than 1,300 kilometres from Eureka along the coast of the Pacific Ocean in the north to the Salton Sea in the south.

Highly-populated areas along fault
A large seismic event could trigger widespread damage in highly-populated areas of the state such as Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside and the Coachella Valley.

“Our results show that stress levels on multiple fault segments are now at or above the highest values seen in the past millennium and that the region may be capable of a large through-going rupture involving both fault systems,” Liliane Burkhard, the study’s lead author, told the school’s website.


“We also found that Cajon Pass may act as an ‘earthquake gate’: sometimes blocking large ruptures from crossing between the faults, and sometimes allowing them to pass through and involve both systems in a single event.”

Notable past disasters
Notable disasters caused by seismic activity along the fault line include the quake that hit and severely damaged San Francisco in 1906, another less serious event in 1989, and a major upheaval in the Los Angeles suburb of Northridge in 1994.

The study, published in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, used computer models to simulate the pressure on the plates built up and released in the southern portion of the fault zones based on past earthquakes and geological evidence dating back 1,000 years.

Results from the study suggest geological conditions are ripe for the Big One, but researchers warn a massive earthquake is not imminent.

‘Not a prediction’
“This is not a prediction of when an earthquake will happen,” said Burkhard, research affiliate in the Hawai’i Institute of Geophysics and Planetology at the UH Manoa School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology.


“However, studies like this are important contributions to national and global earthquake hazard research in that we are using rigorous, quantitative science to better understand the risk facing millions of people. What we can say is that the system is critically stressed, and that physics-based models like this one give us a clearer picture of the range of scenarios we should be prepared for. That information matters for hazard assessments, infrastructure planning, and emergency preparedness.”

The fault line has been active recently with more than 350 small earthquakes recorded in Southern California near the border with Mexico last month, reports Fox affiliate KSWB.

http://fox5sandiego.com/news/earthquakes/southern-california-rattled-by-earthquake-swarm

http://hawaii.edu/news/2026/06/10/san-andreas-fault-stress

http://britannica.com/place/San-Andreas-Fault

California's San Andreas fault ripe for massive earthquake, study finds

Could Southern California be due for a massive earthquake in the not-too-distant future? Read more.

torontosun.com

 

[spaminator]

First leather bag from T-Rex cells to be auctioned in Paris
Briano noted the material differs from vegan leather, which is mostly made from plastic.

Author of the article:AFP
AFP
Published Jun 11, 2026 • 1 minute read

The first-ever leather bag made from Tyrannosaurus rex cells will be auctioned off at Hotel Drouot in Paris. Photo by STEPHANE DE SAKUTIN /AFP

Paris (France) (AFP) — A leather bag made from Tyrannosaurus rex cells will be auctioned off on Thursday by Paris auction house Giquello, estimating the “one-of-a-kind” piece could sell for more than $500,000.


Unveiled in the spring in Amsterdam, the bag was created from traces of collagen from the femur of a T‑Rex found in the US state of Montana 25 years ago.

“In recent years, we’ve developed techniques — biotechnologies that allow us to instruct a cell culture to produce, so to speak, genuine T‑Rex skin in the laboratory,” Iacopo Briano, a paleontology expert associated with the sale, recently told AFP.

The auction house Drouot, where the bag is to be sold at 6 pm (1600 GMT), described it as “an object without precedent in the history of luxury” and a “scientific feat” that makes it possible to create leather “without any reliance on animal rearing”, in a recent statement.

Briano noted the material differs from vegan leather, which is mostly made from plastic.


“In this case, it’s derived from a cell culture, so it’s 100 percent skin. And at the same time, it comes from an animal that went extinct 67 million years ago!” he said.

With no precedent to go on, Alexandre Giquello, whose auction house is organising the sale, explained they had to “come up with a price” that would reflect both the amount of investment required to create the bag and its rarity.

Giquello has estimated the value at between 300,000 and 500,000 euros ($346,000 to $576,000).

It is “a very, very large sum of money”, Giquello told AFP.

“At the same time, it’s one of a kind. And since rare things are expensive, that’s the result,” he added.
View attachment 34712

First leather bag from T-Rex cells to be auctioned in Paris

The bag was created from traces of collagen from the femur of a T‑Rex found in the US state of Montana 25 years ago.

torontosun.com

as soon as i win a powerball lottery i will get 2 for my sisters.

 

[spaminator]

City of Toronto spending another $240,000 on rain barrel program
City council approved the expansion of the subsidy program at the behest of Mayor Olivia Chow, who called it “incredibly popular”

Author of the article:Justin Holmes
Published Jun 24, 2026 • Last updated 5 hours ago • 2 minute read

City of Toronto rain barrel
City council has approved the spending of an extra $240,000 on Toronto’s rain barrel program, essentially doubling the funding for the subsidy. Photo by City of Toronto

The City of Toronto is rolling out the barrels.


City council approved the spending of an extra $240,000 on Toronto’s rain barrel subsidy program on Wednesday, at the behest of Mayor Olivia Chow. That roughly doubles the funding for a program that began just this year.

“I just want to say that this is (an) incredibly popular program,” Chow told the council chambers Wednesday evening. “Let your local residents know, because last time within a couple of hours, it was gone.

“It’s good for the flowers. It’s good for your water bill – it’ll go down, and you’re not wasting water on top of it. If there’s a heavy rainfall, hopefully the rain barrel will capture some of the rain and maybe it’ll prevent your flooding.”

The extra spending is, pardon the pun, a drop in the bucket compared with the city’s $2.55-million pilot program for storm water management on private property, which council approved late last year alongside the rain barrel subsidy. That pilot program, which covers features such as landscaping, runs from this year until 2029.


Chow previously told a city committee in a letter that the first round of barrels sold out in just nine hours, and added that city hall has heard from plenty of Torontonians who want another chance to get one.

Wednesday’s move not only bought another round, it also modified the program to limit the number of rain barrels per street address. While a Toronto home initially could get two subsidized rain barrels, that’s now capped at just one.

speeders
Toronto Mayor Olivia Chow addresses reporters at Sunnybrook Hospital in Toronto on Thursday June 11, 2026. Photo by Ernest Doroszuk/Toronto Sun/Postmedia
Those ‘lucky’ few
Under the program, the city covers most of the price of rain barrels and downspout diverters, and pays for delivery too. A municipal document says the city’s share is 80%.

Home Depot Canada’s website lists rain barrels from the city’s partner, Enviro World, at prices above $100, but the program’s dedicated page on the City of Toronto’s website says the subsidized cost is just $8.95 plus tax, and $1 for a downspout diverter.

Councillor Stephen Holyday argued the city’s offer might be too generous.

“I would urge staff to take a look at the price that they charge people – and it’s not to say that they have to charge the 100% market price, because this is a city subsidy program, but if it sold out in nine hours, that tells you something,” Holyday said, addressing council via a video call.


“I think there may be a little bit more of a way to moderate the program so that people can get an incentive to install one of these and we don’t run out within hours,” he added. The way the first round went, Holyday said, some people were “lucky enough to get their application in” while the rest were left to “scrounge plastic containers and buckets” to use as rain barrels.

But if bureaucrats take heed of Holyday’s advice, it won’t be at the direction of council. Right after his remarks, the program expansion was passed with a quick show of hands with no amendments to Chow’s proposal.

No date was mentioned as to when Torontonians can sign up for the next round of subsidized rain barrels, but the first batch of barrels was sent out to homes this month.

jholmes@postmedia.com

Rain Barrel Savings Program

Deliveries for the Rain Barrel Savings Program will start on Friday, June 5 and are expected to be completed by Monday, June 15. Residents do not need to be home to receive the delivery. If you have not received your rain barrel by June 22, please contact Enviro World at...

toronto.ca

http://toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2025/ie/bgrd/backgroundfile-258467.pdf

City of Toronto spending another $240,000 on rain barrel program

City council has approved the spending of an extra $240,000 on Toronto’s rain barrel subsidy program, at the behest of Mayor Olivia Chow.

torontosun.com

 

[spaminator]

Mystery illness leaves young father paralyzed from the neck down
Wife says doctors may never determine what caused the sudden illness that struck the healthy 29-year-old man.

Author of the article:Brian Williams
Published Jun 23, 2026 • Last updated 16 hours ago • 2 minute read

Scott Martin with his wife, Hannah, and their son, Jack. (GoFundMe/Supplied photo)
Scott Martin with his wife, Hannah, and their son, Jack. (GoFundMe/Supplied photo)
The mysterious cause of an illness that left Scott Martin paralyzed from the neck down may never be known.


“(Doctors) are still wrestling with it,” said Hannah Martin, 29. “They’re calling it like a meningitis, but they don’t have a definitive cause for it, and he presented very atypically, so it’s a confusing case.”


The devastating ordeal began a little more than a month ago.

The Friday before Mother’s Day weekend, a “bad headache” sent Scott, a healthy 29-year-old mechanical engineer, home from work, Hannah recalled.

About 24 hours later, Scott woke up paralyzed in both legs and unable to move the lower half of his body, Hannah said.

An ambulance was called to the couple’s home in Beachville, a small community between Woodstock and Ingersoll, where they live with their 18-month-old son, Jack.

Scott’s condition worsened after he was admitted to hospital.

“About 24 to 36 hours after that, the paralysis ascended to his entire diaphragm and arms and everything,” Hannah said.

The illness progressed to the point that Scott required a ventilator to breathe, although he has since been able to come off the machine during the day.


After brief stays at Woodstock Hospital and Victoria Hospital, Scott was transferred to the intensive care unit at University Hospital, where he remains.

Part of what has baffled doctors is the uncertainty surrounding what caused such a severe illness in a 29-year-old who played hockey and remained active, Hannah said.

“Days before he went into the hospital, he was going for a run and working in the yard . . . so he was quite healthy,” she said.

“The doctors, everyone’s been great. They have every team imaginable involved, and they’ve been sending all the tests, but they’ve kind of told us we will likely never know what exactly caused it.”

Hannah visits Scott every day and said he is coping as well as possible under the difficult circumstances.

She said communicating with family helps keep his spirits up, but he continues to experience significant neck pain.

Adding to the family’s challenges, Hannah, a nurse, recently returned to work from maternity leave and has not accumulated enough hours to qualify for employment insurance benefits.


A GoFundMe campaign has been launched to help ease the financial burden on the family.

According to the fundraising page, the money will help cover medical-related expenses, lost income and other costs associated with Scott’s lengthy hospitalization and recovery.

Doctors are uncertain whether Scott will regain any mobility, Hannah said, but hope “he’ll regain something.”

“It’ll be months to years before we know what he gets back,” she said.

Hannah said she does not know what the future holds, but is grateful for the support the family has received.

bwilliams@postmedia.com

Mystery illness leaves young father paralyzed from the neck down

Wife says doctors may never determine what caused the sudden illness that struck the healthy 29-year-old man.

torontosun.com

 

[spaminator]

Antibacterial soap may be breeding superbugs
Hygiene not only saves lives. It sells. Since the 1950s, companies have been adding "antimicrobial" compounds to soaps, touting their effectiveness at killing "99.9%" of germs.

Author of the article:Washington Post
Washington Post
Michael J. Coren
Published Jun 30, 2026 • Last updated 18 hours ago • 6 minute read

Bath Liquid Soap Clean Skin
Photo by Beni /Adobe Stock
Modern medicine is wildly successful at stopping infections that breach the body’s defences. But far more lives have probably been saved by basic hygiene and clean water that prevent them in the first place.


Good hygiene has virtually eliminated once-feared diseases like cholera, typhoid and dysentery in the developed world by breaking the chain of disease transmission. If the rest of the world had greater access to it, the World Health Organization estimates 1.4 million deaths could be prevented each year. That’s why readers of BMJ, formerly the British Medical Journal, voted the “sanitary revolution” the greatest medical advance since 1840, ahead of antibiotics and anesthesia.


Hygiene not only saves lives. It sells. Since the 1950s, companies have been adding “antimicrobial” compounds to soaps, touting their effectiveness at killing “99.9%” of germs.

These antimicrobial soaps are mostly hygiene theater: Scientists say plain soap and water is just as effective. Worse, these unnecessary compounds may be contributing to a newer problem: resistance to lifesaving antibiotics.

The coronavirus pandemic supercharged the use of antimicrobial products, despite their ineffectiveness against a largely airborne disease. Their active ingredients are now found in hand soap, laundry detergent, cosmetics and more – plus the blood and breast milk of many Americans.


Here’s why plain soap and water remain your best bet against colds and germs – and when disinfecting makes sense.

Skim your grocery store’s cleaning aisle and you’ll find antimicrobial soaps claiming to kill “99.9% of bacteria.” Plain soap a few feet away offers a similar promise to “wash away” germs.

Both claims are true, for different reasons.

Soap molecules have two ends: one that loves oil and one that loves water. The oil-loving end breaks up oily grime and, like a little crowbar, pierces the exterior membrane that encloses many germs. The water-loving end then ensures everything goes down the drain with the rinse water. Soap, in other words, mostly removes rather than kills. Antimicrobial chemicals just focus on the latter: The ingredients – often a quaternary ammonium compound like benzalkonium chloride that are also known as “quats” – kill microbes directly, typically by rupturing their external membrane.

The end result, however, is virtually identical: Both plain soap and antimicrobial products dispatch the offending bacteria or viruses, reducing your chances of getting sick. In fact, decades of studies have found no difference in illness between homes that use antimicrobial products and those that don’t.


A 2007 peer-reviewed analysis of 27 studies in Clinical Infectious Diseases found that triclosan, a powerful antimicrobial, was “no more effective than plain soap” at preventing symptoms of infectious illness or lowering bacterial levels on people’s hands. In laboratory studies, triclosan-resistant bacteria show increased resistance to antibiotics, evidence that antimicrobials in soaps are not just ineffective, but could contribute to the evolution of superbugs.

“There was no independent, peer-reviewed evidence that those soaps removed more pathogenic bacteria than plain soap in a typical hand-washing situation, or reduced illness in households,” said Rebecca Fuoco at the Green Science Policy Institute, a nonprofit group seeking to reduce toxic substances in products and the environment. “It was just marketing.”

In 2016, the Food and Drug Administration considered banning these potent biocides for home use, but decided not to do so. The agency did ban 19 active ingredients, including triclosan, from home antiseptic wash products. It found manufacturers had not proved these antimicrobial ingredients were safe for daily, long-term use or more effective than plain soap.


But the FDA left a crucial loophole: The industry got one year to prove the safety and effectiveness of three other chemicals that could replace triclosan – chloroxylenol and two compounds known as “quats,” benzalkonium chloride and benzethonium chloride. That initial 12 months of regulatory purgatory has long expired, but the “deferrals” have been extended for a decade despite growing evidence of health risks. More than a third of the U.S. disinfectant market now have this new generation of antimicrobial products.

Fuoco and others warn that these powerful chemical disinfectants are accumulating in our bodies and the environment, where they may potentially contribute to antimicrobial resistance. That’s the process by which microbes become resistant to compounds such as antibiotics, disarming one of the most powerful weapons of modern medicine. Microbes have been seen in lab experiments to evolve defences against antimicrobials that also confer resistance to antibiotics used to treat infections.


The World Health Organization warns that 1 in 6 common bacterial infections are now resistant to standard antibiotics, a 40 percent increase between 2018 and 2023. Resistant infections caused about 1 million deaths annually between 1990 and 2021, a figure projected to double by 2050.

The global fight against antimicrobial resistance has largely focused on managing use of antibiotics used in health care and agriculture, the problem’s main drivers. Fuoco argues that household products containing quats and other antimicrobial compounds in hand soaps, disinfecting wipes and sprays, laundry sanitizers, plastics, textiles and personal care products may be doing the same.

While there’s still some scientific uncertainty about whether biocides are driving resistance in human pathogens in homes, evidence from the lab suggests they share similarities to other sources of microbial resistance.

How should we stay clean without potentially breeding superbugs?


Fuoco frames it as a no-regrets decision: “You have the major U.S. and world public health authorities all look at the science and agree that there’s no benefit, only risks of these soaps,” she said.

We don’t need – and should not have – sterile homes. Bacteria are everywhere and our microbiome, the community of microorganisms that live on and inside our bodies, depends on them being around us. The vast majority are benign or beneficial, and even keep nasty pathogens in check.

Plain soap and water remain the first line of defence to stop the transmission of potential pathogens in their tracks, at home, at school or elsewhere, Theresa Michele of the FDA’s Division of Nonprescription Drug Products previously told STAT News. “We can’t advise this enough.” Wetting your hands and lathering for about 10 to 20 seconds before drying removes virtually all common bacteria and viruses as effectively as any biocide, or more effectively for some viruses.

Canadian health officer Bonnie Henry gave some sound advice during the pandemic: “Wash your hands like you’ve been chopping jalapeños and you need to change your contacts.”


Disinfection, which is less intense than sterilization, makes the most sense when you need to eliminate something uniquely virulent or risky. That’s typically when a surface is contaminated with bodily fluids, raw meat, when someone in the household is immunocompromised, or when you suspect someone has a stomach bug or diarrhea (often a persistent norovirus).

In those situations, health authorities such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend a two-step process: Clean with soap and water to remove dirt and grime first, then use an Environmental Protection Agency-registered disinfecting product or a diluted bleach solution to kill any lingering pathogens. The bleach eventually breaks down into salt, water and oxygen.

For Maya Nadimpalli, an assistant professor at Emory University’s Rollins School of Public Health who studies microbial resistance, disinfection at home is rarely the point. She and her husband, a research immunologist, embrace the hygiene hypothesis, the idea that early exposure to routine microbes supports the development of children’s immune systems and reduces the risk of future allergic and autoimmune conditions. (You should still avoid exposure to severe disease, especially respiratory viruses for very young children).

Pursuing a sterile home can backfire. At home, Nadimpalli’s family typically uses the simplest soaps they can buy without fragrances or biocides. “We are hygienic but we are not into this 99.9 percent bacteria removal in everything we do,” she told me. “Developing a healthy immune system is the goal for our kids.”

Antibacterial soap may be breeding superbugs

Modern medicine is wildly successful at stopping infections that breach the body's defences.

torontosun.com