Monday, February 5, 2018

Youtube daily report Feb 5 2018

SECRET CHINESE CODE to get a FREE LEGENDARY in Clash Royale!

For more infomation >> SECRET CHINESE CODE to get a FREE LEGENDARY in Clash Royale! - Duration: 8:24.

-------------------------------------------

Opel Insignia 2.0 CDTI ECOFLEX BUSINESS+ | Airco | Cruise | Navi | PDC | - Duration: 0:59.

For more infomation >> Opel Insignia 2.0 CDTI ECOFLEX BUSINESS+ | Airco | Cruise | Navi | PDC | - Duration: 0:59.

-------------------------------------------

누누 봇 스킨 추천 인게임|K-News - Duration: 2:09.

For more infomation >> 누누 봇 스킨 추천 인게임|K-News - Duration: 2:09.

-------------------------------------------

Opel Insignia Grand Sport 1.5 Turbo 165pk Automaat, Business Executive ** Full Options * - Duration: 0:56.

For more infomation >> Opel Insignia Grand Sport 1.5 Turbo 165pk Automaat, Business Executive ** Full Options * - Duration: 0:56.

-------------------------------------------

Opel Astra 1.4 Turbo SPORTS TOURER 140PK Cosmo - Duration: 0:58.

For more infomation >> Opel Astra 1.4 Turbo SPORTS TOURER 140PK Cosmo - Duration: 0:58.

-------------------------------------------

Opel Astra 1.4 Turbo Start/Stop 140pk BlitZ - Duration: 0:57.

For more infomation >> Opel Astra 1.4 Turbo Start/Stop 140pk BlitZ - Duration: 0:57.

-------------------------------------------

옥소리 근황 이탈리아 남편 성형전 재혼 박철 이혼사유, 옥소리가 재혼한 남편이 박철이 지목한 내연남 G씨 였다 - Duration: 3:37.

For more infomation >> 옥소리 근황 이탈리아 남편 성형전 재혼 박철 이혼사유, 옥소리가 재혼한 남편이 박철이 지목한 내연남 G씨 였다 - Duration: 3:37.

-------------------------------------------

Appliquez cette huile sur vos cheveux pour éliminer les pellicules et la perte de cheveux - Duration: 6:32.

For more infomation >> Appliquez cette huile sur vos cheveux pour éliminer les pellicules et la perte de cheveux - Duration: 6:32.

-------------------------------------------

Trực tiếp U23Việt Nam vào 20h ngày 6/2 trên kênhVTV6,Từ những cậu bé chân trần tới người hùng sân cỏ - Duration: 4:57.

For more infomation >> Trực tiếp U23Việt Nam vào 20h ngày 6/2 trên kênhVTV6,Từ những cậu bé chân trần tới người hùng sân cỏ - Duration: 4:57.

-------------------------------------------

曾莞婷驚爆「秘戀賓士男」車上玩親親!深夜約會「新歡身分」曝光嚇歪大家:財力太驚人! - Duration: 8:59.

For more infomation >> 曾莞婷驚爆「秘戀賓士男」車上玩親親!深夜約會「新歡身分」曝光嚇歪大家:財力太驚人! - Duration: 8:59.

-------------------------------------------

Chez moi, on ne jette plus les pelures d'ananas. Voilà pourquoi ! - Duration: 6:29.

For more infomation >> Chez moi, on ne jette plus les pelures d'ananas. Voilà pourquoi ! - Duration: 6:29.

-------------------------------------------

Opel Corsa ONLINE EDITION 1.0T 90PK 5D - INTELLILINK - COLOR+ - Duration: 1:01.

For more infomation >> Opel Corsa ONLINE EDITION 1.0T 90PK 5D - INTELLILINK - COLOR+ - Duration: 1:01.

-------------------------------------------

Opel KARL 1.0 Start/Stop 75pk ROCKS Online Edition ** DEMO** - Duration: 0:59.

For more infomation >> Opel KARL 1.0 Start/Stop 75pk ROCKS Online Edition ** DEMO** - Duration: 0:59.

-------------------------------------------

UTILEV® - The Utility Lift Truck

For more infomation >> UTILEV® - The Utility Lift Truck

-------------------------------------------

Hyundai ix35 1.6I GDI Bleu Drive Exclusive , Navi, H Leer, Camera, ECC - Duration: 0:59.

For more infomation >> Hyundai ix35 1.6I GDI Bleu Drive Exclusive , Navi, H Leer, Camera, ECC - Duration: 0:59.

-------------------------------------------

Audi A4 1.4 TFSI 150PK Avant S-Tronic | Navigatie | Climate Control | - Duration: 0:56.

For more infomation >> Audi A4 1.4 TFSI 150PK Avant S-Tronic | Navigatie | Climate Control | - Duration: 0:56.

-------------------------------------------

J. Hernández - Yeya (Prod. Came Beats) - Duration: 3:04.

For more infomation >> J. Hernández - Yeya (Prod. Came Beats) - Duration: 3:04.

-------------------------------------------

The Great Snake Debate - Duration: 7:21.

90 million years ago, a stealthy predator slipped in and out of burrows that it dug

in the shadows of the dinosaurs, in what would later become Argentina.

Today this creature is known as Najash -- named after a monstrous biblical snake.

And, for the most part, it had all of the classic traits that you expect a snake to

have, like a long, sinuous body and ribs for days.

But this ancient snake also had … legs.

Which sounds weird, right?

Like a snake with limbs?

But what's even stranger about this creature is: We're not at all sure where it came

from.

OK, first, let me answer the question that's probably on your mind already: Yes!

Najash is considered a true snake, even though it had legs -- two of them, toward the back

of its body.

It's one of the earliest known snakes in the fossil record found with limbs intact.

But it was by no means the only one.

Snakes-with-legs have been described in such disparate places as Great Britain, Morocco,

Romania, and Wyoming.

Some of these reptiles, like Najash, had two legs.

Others might have had four.

But most of them are known from only a few bones -- a piece of a jaw here or a vertebra

there.

And because of this, the evolutionary history of snakes is among the most mysterious of

all the vertebrates.

Biologists know that snakes diverged from lizards, probably as early as the Jurassic

Period, about 200 million years ago, and eventually radiated into the 3,000 species that we have

today.

But we don't really know which group of lizards gave rise to the snakes -- or when

or why they lost their legs in the first place.

We can't answer these questions, because we don't have enough data.

Most of the very oldest snake fossils that have been found are just fragments.

But, we do have a couple of good, if competing, theories about where snakes came from.

Some scientists think that the first snakes descended from burrowing lizards.

Others think they might have come from from lizards that swam in the open ocean.

That's because the way that snakes move seems to work best for either burrowing through

soil, like a worm does, or propelling through water, as eels do.

So, let's start with that.

The consensus is that snakes came from lizards.

But … where does one animal stop and the other one start?

Like what is the difference between a snake with legs and a … lizard?

Well, most of us would identify a snake by its long, slinky body.

But herpetologists actually define snakes not by their slinkiness but by their mouthy-ness.

Specifically, snakes are identified by adaptations in their skulls that allow them to unhinge

their jaws.

For example, several parts of a snake's skull are smaller than they are in other reptiles.

And its two lower jaw bones aren't fused together, like they are in other vertebrates.

Instead, snakes just have a little cartilage there.

These adaptations work together to provide maximum flexibility, so snakes can swallow

things bigger than their own heads.

Which we do not recommend that you try at home.

Because you can't do that.

Snakes are also unique in that they don't have … ears.

No ear holes, no ear drums, and no inner ear bone that other reptiles have.

Instead, what was once their ear bone became fused to their jaw, where it allows snakes

to detect vibrations in the ground.

So, you'd think that knowing all this could help us figure out where snakes came from:

We just have to find out when these adaptations first appeared.

But it turns out, that's not easy.

Because there's evidence that seems to support each hypothesis -- that snakes evolved from

terrestrial lizards, and that they came from aquatic lizards.

Advocates of the aquatic lizard hypothesis, for example, think that snakes may actually

be distant cousins of the fiercest predators of the Cretaceous seas -- the mosasaurs.

Mosasaurs were themselves descended from

land-dwelling lizards.

And like snakes, they developed long bodies and jaw adaptations that allowed them to open

their mouths wide for a crushing bite.

And for decades, researchers looked for an evolutionary link between snakes and mosasaurs

in one of the most-studied snakes of the Cretaceous -- a two-legged snake known as Pachyrhachis

Pachyrhachis was found in the West Bank, near Ramallah -- a region that was underwater when

the snake lived there 95 million years ago.

And studies of its anatomy have found that it probably moved the way an eel does, by

whipping its tail from side-to-side, to get short bursts of speed.

Some paleontologists have argued that snakes like Pachyrhachis descended from mosasaurs,

because they share a lot of similarities in the shape of their skulls, especially around

the jaw.

Plus, Pachyrhachis and other aquatic snakes that have been found in Ramallah were, for

a long time, thought to be the oldest snake fossils ever found.

And if the oldest snakes were marine reptiles, then snakes must have come from the sea, right?

Well, in the last 10 years or so, a bunch of new discoveries have shaken up this idea

-- as well as the rest of the snake family tree.

Paleontologists have recently described at least half a dozen previously unknown species

of ancient snakes -- many of which are even older than Pachyrhachis, and most of them

lived on dry land.

Among these new species is Najash, which lived around the same time as Pachyrhachis, but

many are even older.

Some go back as much as 167 million years, like Eophis, which was described from Great

Britain in 2015.

It's now considered the oldest snake ever found, and it was terrestrial.

So, to some experts, the notion of snakes originating on land makes a lot more sense.

For one thing, many of the classic traits that snakes have, like jawbones that pick

up vibrations, seem better suited for life on the ground.

And not having legs can offer a lot of advantages if you're a reptile that burrows through

the dirt.

After all, the skinnier you are, the skinnier your burrow can be, which makes it easier

to evade predators.

But what about genetics?

Can molecular evidence settle the Great Snake Debate?

Well, in 2013, scientists used gene data from more than four thousand living snake and lizard

species to construct a new family tree for these groups of reptiles.

And the results suggested that snakes' closest relatives are probably the Varanid lizards,

a group that includes monitor lizards and Komodo dragons.

That might sound like score one for the terrestrial hypothesis.

But the problem is, Komodo dragons and their kin are also thought to be the closest living

relatives of the mosasaurs.

So, depending on how you read them, these new genetic data could support EITHER the

terrestrial hypothesis OR the aquatic hypothesis.

Which is kind of frustrating!

But also fascinating!

Ultimately, all we know is that snakes came from lizards, but we don't know the details

of their remarkable transformation.

And we know that there were snakes before the likes of Najash -- the leggy reptile from

Argentina -- but we don't understand which lineage of lizard they came from.

So in the end, snakes pose one of the greatest evolutionary mysteries in the history of animal

life.

Not even modern genomics has been able to tell us how and when they became a thing.

At least, not yet.

Thank you for watching this particularly mystifying episode of Eons.

And thank you to Dr. Allison Hsiang, evolutionary biologist at the Swedish Museum of Natural

History, who consulted with our editorial team on this one

Unsurprisingly, in the entire history of life

There are some pretty big mysteries. If you have questions

We would love to know

some of your great paleo mysteries. Let us know

in the comments if you want us to take on some topics

And you can keep watching by going to youtube.com/eons to subscribe.

Now, have you ever wanted to get a really close look at the natural world?

Then visit Deep Look, from PBS Digital Studios, where you can explore big scientific mysteries

by going incredibly small!

For more infomation >> The Great Snake Debate - Duration: 7:21.

-------------------------------------------

Population Health: Crash Course Sociology #43 - Duration: 9:56.

A person can be healthy...but can a country be healthy?

Population health indicators measure the distribution of health throughout a given population.

These kinds of indicators are what sociologists use to study patterns in health outcomes across different social groups.

Because, like all things sociological, we want to understand the wider patterns of health.

So, if you're trying to figure out your own risks for a disease, it might be useful to know the average number of people like you who have contracted that disease.

Or if you're a policymaker trying to figure out which diseases to spend money and time on,

you might want to know which disease has the highest mortality rates in your country.

As we talked about last time, there are lots of factors that can affect your personal health – and those factors often vary by social group.

So when we explore population health across social dimensions like age, gender, race, ethnicity, class or religious beliefs,

we come up with differences in what health looks like for that group.

Let's start by talking about what some of the important indicators for population health are,

and see what these indicators tell us about health in the United States.

[Theme Music]

When we talk about the importance of health, there's an underlying implication here: humans don't want to die.

The healthier you are, the more likely you are to put off a visit from the grim reaper.

Which is why we use the length of someone's life as one indicator of how healthy they are.

One crude indicator of a population's health is life expectancy – the average number of years an individual can be expected to live.

And you can use life expectancy to get a better understanding of what kind of person tends to live longer,

which is a pretty good proxy for the overall health of a community.

For example, in the United States, and for that matter, almost every other country on the planet, women tend to outlive men.

For men in the United States, the average life expectancy at birth is 76.3 and for women, it's 81.2.

And White Americans tend to live longer than Black Americans.

79 is the life expectancy for White Americans, whereas for Black Americans the number is quite a bit lower: 75.5

In addition to helping us to understand the overall health of the population, or portions of it, life expectancy also tells us something about its future.

Do we expect to have more elderly citizens in the future?

If people live longer, what does that mean for the retirement age?

This has implications for the structure of work and leisure and helps when planning the costs of things like social security and medicare.

Another important population statistic is the birth rate for different populations.

Just as life expectancy helps us answer questions that go beyond health, the birth rate tells us about more than just the reproductive health of a population.

There are a couple different ways to measure the number of kids being born.

One is a straight birth rate: in a given year, how many live births are there for every thousand people?

But that might not be the right measure.

After all, if people are living a lot longer, there are going to be more people who are living past child-bearing age.

This would make the birth rate go down, even if the number of kids each generation has stays constant.

Because of this, we might use what's called a total fertility rate: the number of live births for every 1000 women between the ages of 15 and 44.

Total fertility rates let us compare birth patterns across generations.

A larger generation might have more kids – after all, more parents means more kids – but there might be fewer kids per person, or vice versa!

The number of births per year in the US has been declining over the last 50 years.

Some of that is because there are fewer women of childbearing age now than there were when the Baby Boomers were having kids.

But even If we look at the total fertility rate, that has also gone down,

from 68.4 births per 1000 women of childbearing age in 1980, to 62.5 births per 1000 women of childbearing age in 2015.

Now, if we split up the population up by race, we see big differences in the total fertility rate.

It's highest for Hispanic Americans, at 71.5 births per 1000 women, and lowest for non-Hispanic White Americans, with a total fertility rate of 59.3.

And even here you can see the influence of society on human procreation.

Access to things like contraception and prenatal care, and cultural traditions, shape the number of children that are born.

So, birth rates tell us about the categories of people entering our society, but we might also care about who is leaving us, too.

Mortality rates are death rates in a given population, and they can tell a lot us about its overall health.

For example, infant mortality rates are often a key indicator of a group's health.

Because infants are especially vulnerable to disease and malnutrition,

their mortality rate tells us something about broader issues, like poverty levels, and availability and quality of food, water, and health services.

For example, Black Americans are more than twice as likely as White Americans to die in infancy,

partially because these children are more likely to be born in lower income families.

Lower economic standing generally means less access to health care,

and there's clear evidence that Black Americans are much less likely to have access to quality prenatal care than other racial and ethnic groups.

Overall mortality rates can also help us understand the pace of deaths in a community:

in a given year, how many people in that group have died as a fraction of that population?

Mortality rates tend to be higher for men than women, and higher for Black Americans than White Americans…

which might not too surprising given what we learned about life expectancies for those groups earlier.

In the US, the leading causes of mortality for both men and women of all races are heart disease and cancer.

But what kills men and what kills women differs a bit as we get further down the list of leading causes of death.

Men are much more likely to die from an unintentional injury or accident than women are and also have much higher suicide rates than women.

There are mortality differences by race as well, with Black men more likely to die from homicide than other groups.

Drilling down into this data a little more, we can also understand population health by looking at the types of diseases that different groups are susceptible to.

Morbidity refers to the presence of disease, while morbidity rates tell us something about the frequency of disease within a given population.

Diseases can also be co-morbid, meaning that two diseases coexist in a person at the same time.

Comorbidity rates tell us how common it is for people in a population to have any two diseases at one time.

One thing to note here: incidence of a disease is not the same thing as the prevalence of a disease.

Incidence refers to the number of new cases reported in a given time frame, whereas prevalence refers to the number of existing cases in the population.

So, put another way, incidence tells you how likely you are to contract a disease.

Prevalence tells you how many people already have it.

And I'm sure it won't surprise you to hear that morbidity rates within a society can vary a lot across demographic groups for a number of reasons,

like the racial makeup of a society or the age profile of those people.

Different subpopulations may have different genetic makeups that can influence health.

For example, Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry is associated with higher rates of BRCA-1 mutations, which is a genetic risk factor for breast cancer.

Different populations may also be exposed to health risks resulting from their physical environments, like the neighborhood they live in.

For example, Black children in the US have higher asthma rates relative to White children,

partly because of higher exposure to environmental toxins in their homes and neighborhoods.

But it can be hard to separate the effects of something like pollution from other aspects of where a person lives that might also affect their health.

People who live in poorer neighborhoods are more likely to be exposed to more pollution

– so is it the pollution or the poverty that leads to worse health outcomes?

Let's go to the Thought Bubble to look at this question more closely.

Three American economists, Janet Currie, Michael Greenstone, and Enrico Moretti

figured out a way to separate out the effects of pollution on kids' health by looking at what happened when the government cleaned up toxic waste sites.

All across the United States there are places known as Superfund sites –

areas that the government has deemed so polluted that it requires an expensive, government funded cleanup to make the place habitable.

As of 2015, the EPA found that 53 million Americans live within 3 miles of a Superfund site, including about 18% of children under the age of 5.

Currie, Greenstone, and Moretti compared health outcomes for children who were born near a Superfund site either before or after it was cleaned up

and found that kids born after the clean up were 20% less likely to be born with a congenital anomaly, like heart murmurs.

Since the only thing that had changed with the clean up was the level of pollution, this study tells us something you might already have guessed:

being exposed to toxic chemicals at a young age can be really damaging to your health.

Thanks Thought Bubble.

There are lots of environmental risks that can be damaging to your health – houses with lead paint, second hand smoke, smog.

Because these risk factors tend to be more common in low income areas, they disproportionately affect less educated and minority Americans.

And low income Americans are also more likely to experience social environments that pose health risks.

For example, the amount of stress a person is under can have a big effect on both their mental and physical well-being.

And these groups are more likely to live or work in high stress environments, like neighborhoods with higher crime rates, or unfulfilling jobs with long hours.

Another social factor that affects health? Racism and discrimination.

Sociologist David Williams has connected this unique psychosocial stressor to increased rates of stress- related disease morbidity among African Americans,

like heart disease that may contribute to higher risks of early mortality.

All of these factors – the individual risk factors, environmental risk factors, social risk factors, and psychological risk factors –

combine to help explain the health disparities we see across different social groups in the US.

Today, we learned about some of the indicators that help us measure health for different populations,

including life expectancy, birth rates, mortality rates, and morbidity rates.

Then, we talked about three contributors to health disparities:

individual factors like genetics, physical factors like pollution, and social factors like stress.

Crash Course Sociology is filmed in the Dr. Cheryl C. Kinney Studio in Missoula, MT, and it's made with the help of all of these nice people.

Our animation team is Thought Cafe and Crash Course is made with Adobe Creative Cloud.

If you'd like to keep Crash Course free for everyone, forever, you can support the series at Patreon,

a crowdfunding platform that allows you to support the content you love.

Thank you to all of our patrons for making Crash Course possible with their continued support.

No comments:

Post a Comment