I'm curious to know if "newly discovered" species existed 20 years ago and were actually just discovered, or if they are a new species that didn't exist until recently.
Is there a way to tell?
Examining old hosts that have died and been preserved and seeing if the 'new species' exists there maybe?
> I'm curious to know if "newly discovered" species existed 20 years ago and were actually just discovered,
That's exactly it, these wasps existed previously and were just discovered to be distinct from other wasps. Speciation tends to take a very long time (on the order of hundreds of thousands to millions of years) or much shorter if there's a strong enough pressure (e.g. something drastically alters an ecosystem and opens up a lot of new niches for a species to radiate into) but still on the order of tens of thousands of years, see [1] for a great example. This of course depends on generation time (evolution only happens to populations, not individuals), so we see quite rapid evolution in things with short generation times like bacteria.
For invetebrates like small wasps like this one, it's typically taking the time to sit down and actually identifying them, some species are quite cryptic and it's only obscure or small morphological features that can be used to separate them by eye, and requires genetic analysis to compare and confirm that it's a new species.
> Examining old hosts that have died and been preserved and seeing if the 'new species' exists there maybe?
I have an entomologist friend and yes, that does happen. There are probably countless new species that have specimens in museums and universities right now that just haven't been properly analysed
Differences in wall-to-wall distances at middle and longer distances are less important than in shorter distances. The article uses a 100m race. But consider a 50m race. 3 cm over 5,000 cm is a .06% difference. That's easily 1/100 of a second in a 24 second race.
But in longer races, there are many other factors that add noise to this. For one, swimmers aren't competing in a pool where one has to swim 1,500m and another 1,499m pool. They are making turns. A 3cm different is well within the 'noise' of a flip turn.
Also, there is drafting and bow waves, and other things going on that have a bigger effect than the 3cm per length.
Driving while using a mobile and drunk driving are qualitatively different for at least one important reason...
If I'm talking or texting while I'm driving, I can stop if traffic patterns become sketchy. I can't suddenly stop being drunk.
Clear and dry with light traffic is very different than snow in a construction zone. Phone use is something I can stop doing. The same can't be said for being drunk.
What kind of business person waits until their personal taxes are due to find their expenses? This should be done quarterly if not monthly. Use a separate account for business expenses. Hire a bookkeeper.
Based on the timeline, he had to have contracted Ebola pretty much the day he left.
That seems pretty unusual, isn't it? How long was he there, a couple months?
"Symptoms usually occur within eight to 10 days of infection and Dr. Spencer had been home nine days when he reported feeling ill." That's not including travel time local and international.
At the same time, I wouldn't be surprised if people tend to let their guard down in the days and hours before they leave the country.
Instead of quarantining by default, I think it would be interesting to offer a free, relaxing vacation in a low population density region to people who are returning from helping in Africa. i.e. you cannot leave West Africa and return to a major city directly. Instead you fly back to your home country by way of a desirable destination and hang out there for a few weeks.
It would be really cheap for the rest of us to provide
"the basics", e.g. a flatscreen TV (get the cableco or DirectTV and/or Dish to donate service), Internet connection (ditto on trying to get it for free from a provider) and if needed a computer, and then it won't be that onerous. Historically to my knowledge we typically haven't gone the prison route outside of special cases like Typhoid Mary.
I think this is something like selection bias: had he contracted ebola earlier he wouldn't have returned to the US, or maybe would have been shipped back for treatment, which would be a very different headline.
"Background:
21 days has been regarded as the appropriate quarantine period for holding individuals potentially exposed to Ebola Virus (EV) to reduce risk of contagion. There does not appear to be a systematic discussion of the basis for this period.
Methods:
The prior estimates for incubation time to EV were examined, along with data on the first 9 months of the current outbreak. These provided estimates of the distribution of incubation times.
Results:
A 21 day period for quarantine may result in the release of individuals with a 0.2 – 12% risk of release prior to full opportunity for the incubation to proceed. It is suggested that a detailed cost-benefit assessment, including considering full transmission risks, needs to occur in order to determine the appropriate quarantine period for potentially exposed individuals."
Is there a way to tell?
Examining old hosts that have died and been preserved and seeing if the 'new species' exists there maybe?