from the world's big
8 logical fallacies that are hard to spot
From "if-by-whiskey" to the McNamara fallacy, being able to spot logical missteps is an invaluable skill.
- A fallacy is the use of invalid or faulty reasoning in an argument.
- There are two broad types of logical fallacies: formal and informal.
- A formal fallacy describes a flaw in the construction of a deductive argument, while an informal fallacy describes an error in reasoning.
In arguments, few things are more frustrating than when you realize that someone is using bad logic, but you can't quite identify what the problem is.
This rarely happens with the more well-known logical fallacies. For example, when someone in an argument starts criticizing the other person's reputation instead of their ideas, most people know that's an ad hominem attack. Or, when someone compares two things to support their argument, but it doesn't make sense, that's a false equivalency. But other fallacies are harder to spot. For example, say you're arguing about politics with a friend, and they say:
"The far-left is crazy. The far-right is violent. That's why the right answers lie the middle."
Sure, it might be true that moderation is the answer. But just because two extremes exist doesn't mean that the truth necessarily lies between those extremes. Put more starkly: If one person says the sky is blue, but someone else says it's yellow, that doesn't mean the sky is green. This is an argument to moderation, or the middle ground fallacy — you hear it a lot from people who are trying to mediate conflicts.
When you find yourself in arguments, it's valuable to be able to spot and, if necessary, call out logical fallacies like this. It can protect you against bad ideas. Check out a few more examples of logical fallacies that can be tough to spot.
Appeal to privacy
When someone behaves in a way that negatively affects (or could affect) others, but then gets upset when others criticize their behavior, they're likely engaging in the appeal to privacy — or "mind your own business" — fallacy. Examples:
- Someone who speeds excessively on the highway, considering his driving to be his own business.
- Someone who doesn't see a reason to bathe or wear deodorant, but then boards a packed 10-hour flight.
Language to watch out for: "You're not the boss of me." "Worry about yourself."
Sunk cost fallacy
When someone argues for continuing a course of action despite evidence showing it's a mistake, it's often a sunk cost fallacy. The flawed logic here is something like: "We've already invested so much in this plan, we can't give up now." Examples:
- Someone who intentionally overeats at an all-you-can-eat buffet just to get their "money's worth"
- A scientist who won't admit his theory is incorrect because it would be too painful or costly
Language to watch out for: "We must stay the course." "I've already invested so much...." "We've always done it this way, so we'll keep doing it this way."
This fallacy is named after a speech given in 1952 by Noah S. "Soggy" Sweat, Jr., a state representative for Mississippi, on the subject of whether the state should legalize alcohol. Sweat's argument on prohibition was (to paraphrase):
If, by whiskey, you mean the devil's brew that causes so many problems in society, then I'm against it. But if whiskey means the oil of conversation, the philosopher's wine, "the stimulating drink that puts the spring in the old gentleman's step on a frosty, crispy morning;" then I am certainly for it.
Note: If-by-whiskey really only becomes a fallacy when it's used to conceal a lack of position, or to dodge a tough question. In Sweat's speech, if-by-whiskey was an effective rhetorical device used to summarize two competing perspectives on alcohol, and to make his position clear.
RationalWiki provides an example of the usual format this fallacy takes:
"If by [noun], you mean [negative descriptors of noun], then of course [statement of lack of support/belief]. If, however, by [noun], you mean [positive descriptors of noun], then [statement of support/belief]."
This fallacy involves arguing against a position because you think choosing it would start a chain reaction of bad things, even though there's little evidence to support your claim. Example:
- "We can't allow abortion because then society will lose its general respect for life, and it'll become harder to punish people for committing violent acts like murder."
- "We can't legalize gay marriage. If we do, what's next? Allowing people to marry cats and dogs?" (Some people actually made this argument before same-sex marriage was legalized in the U.S.)
Of course, sometimes decisions do start a chain reaction, which could be bad. The slippery slope device only becomes a fallacy when there's no evidence to suggest that chain reaction would actually occur.
Language to watch out for: "If we do that, then what's next?"
"There is no alternative"
A modification of the false dilemma, this fallacy (often abbreviated to TINA) argues for a specific position because there are no realistic alternatives. Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher used this exact line as a slogan to defend capitalism, and it's still used today to that same end: Sure, capitalism has its problems, but we've seen the horrors that occur when we try anything else, so there is no alternative.
Language to watch out for: "If I had a magic wand…" "What else are we going to do?!"
Ad hoc arguments
An ad hoc argument isn't really a logical fallacy, but it is a fallacious rhetorical strategy that's common and often hard to spot. It occurs when someone's claim is threatened with counterevidence, so they come up with a rationale to dismiss the counterevidence, hoping to protect their original claim. Ad hoc claims aren't designed to be generalizable. Instead, they're typically invented in the moment. RationalWiki provides an example:
Alice: "It is clearly said in the Bible that the Ark was 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high."
Bob: "A purely wooden vessel of that size could not be constructed; the largest real wooden vessels were Chinese treasure ships which required iron hoops to build their keels. Even the Wyoming which was built in 1909 and had iron braces had problems with her hull flexing and opening up and needed constant mechanical pumping to stop her hold flooding."
Alice: "It's possible that God intervened and allowed the Ark to float, and since we don't know what gopher wood is, it is possible that it is a much stronger form of wood than any that comes from a modern tree."
This fallacy occurs when someone doesn't really have a strong argument, so they just throw a bunch of irrelevant facts, numbers, anecdotes and other information at the audience to confuse the issue, making it harder to refute the original claim. Example:
- A tobacco company spokesperson who is confronted about the health risks of smoking, but then proceeds to show graph after graph depicting many of the other ways people develop cancer, and how cancer metastasizes in the body, etc.
Watch out for long-winded, data-heavy arguments that seem confusing by design.
Named after Robert McNamara, the U.S. secretary of defense from 1961 to 1968, this fallacy occurs when decisions are made based solely on quantitative metrics or observations, ignoring other factors. It stems from the Vietnam War, in which McNamara sought to develop a formula to measure progress in the war. He decided on bodycount. But this "objective" formula didn't account for other important factors, such as the possibility that the Vietnamese people would never surrender.
You could also imagine this fallacy playing out in a medical situation. Imagine a terminal cancer patient has a tumor, and a certain procedure helps to reduce the size of the tumor, but also causes a lot of pain. Ignoring quality of life would be an example of the McNamara fallacy.
Language to watch out for: "You can't measure that, so it's not important."
New book focuses on some of the world's most peculiar borderlines.
- Borders have a simple job: separate different areas from each other.
- But they can get complicated fast, as shown by a new book.
- Here are a few of the bizarre borders it focuses on.
Simple in theory<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzM4Mjk1NC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyNTMyMzk1NX0.Qrzz1NidF-34YifuyHPPNg-cw1Fbd1_6iX6O7zGBF3Q/img.jpg?width=980" id="49560" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="cdc1c568091fd1c8d52555f6ee96752b" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="\u200bThe island of M\u00e4rket has a strange border dividing it into a Swedish and a Finnish half. Why? Because of a misplaced lighthouse." />
The island of Märket has a strange border dividing it into a Swedish and a Finnish half. Why? Because of a misplaced Finnish lighthouse (shown on the western half of the island).
Image reproduced by kind permission of HarperCollins<p>What separates us humans from other animals? The use of tools or language? The invention of God or music? The ability to blush? (According to Mark Twain, we're the only animal that can – or needs to). The jury is still out. For a swifter verdict, ask what separates humans from each other. Quite literally, it's borders.</p><p><span></span>Those borders can be the subtle separators of culture and class; the more tangible distinctions of race and gender; or the physical demarcations between this country and that. The job description for political borders is simple and straightforward enough: draw a line between areas with different rules (and rulers). But, as shown in a new book, those lines are not always straight and simple. </p><p>For reasons geographical, dynastic, military or otherwise, things on the ground can get quite complex quite fast. In "<a href="https://www.harpercollins.co.uk/9780008351779/the-atlas-of-unusual-borders-discover-intriguing-boundaries-territories-and-geographical-curiosities/" target="_blank" style="">The Atlas of Unusual Borders</a>," map enthusiast Zoran Nikolic zooms in on some of the world's most egregious examples of border weirdness. Here are a few samples from the recently published book. <br></p>
The Cypriot puzzle<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzM4Mjk1NS9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzMDg5OTYyMX0.hx59ZmkR_zenzDGZPA-M25fhu7OXBgXfSjgqba9z050/img.png?width=980" id="6dcfc" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="b9c4e878a7b1c682b905b4462c2b6791" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="Ideally, \u200bCyprus shouldn't have any internal borders at all." />
Ideally, Cyprus shouldn't have any internal borders at all. Then, history happened.
Image reproduced by kind permission of HarperCollins<p>Cyprus is a good example of the distance between theory and practice. As an island nation, it shouldn't even have land borders. Yet the small Mediterranean country is riven with borders, establishing four different political entities.</p><p><span></span>The oldest Cypriot border only goes back to 1960, when the island gained its independence from Britain. The former colonial overlord retained two large military bases, covering a total of 3 percent of the island's territory. Today, Akrotiri and Dhekelia – strategically close to the Middle East – remain under British control. </p><p><span></span>But while Akrotiri, near the city of Limassol, is a single, contiguous lump of land, Dhekelia, the other 'Sovereign Base Area', seems designed to make life difficult for the Cypriots: a tentacle pokes through in the direction of the island's eastern shore, almost touching Varosia, a former jet set hotspot just south of Famagusta, now a dystopian no man's land. The main body of Dhekelia is dotted with numerous exclaves of Cypriot sovereignty, containing two entire villages and one power station.</p><p><span></span>Dystopian no man's land? That goes back to 1974, when Turkey invaded, to help Turkish Cypriots set up their own, internationally unrecognised state in the north of the island. The as yet unresolved nature of that conflict is symbolised by the Green Line, separating the official, Greek-majority south of the island from the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus – recognised only by Turkey itself. That Green Line is not actually a line, but a UN-administered buffer zone, wide enough to contain the island's <a href="https://www.worldabandoned.com/nicosia-airport" target="_blank">former international airport</a>, for example. </p><p>The 1974 conflict has also stranded a Turkish-Cypriot coastal town south of the line. Erenköy (in Turkish; Kokkina in Greek), in the west, is a ghost port, a small Turkish garrison its only occupants. In the east, the Green Line intersects with the already complicated borders of Dhekelia, cutting off a large part of Greek Cyprus from its 'mainland'. However, traffic with the rest of Greek Cyprus is possible via Dhekelia, ensuring a steady flow of tourists to Ayia Napa, the exclave's main resort. <br></p>
Four Corners Canada<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzM4Mjk1OS9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxODU2NjE4MH0.F8WNdQQ30ZwOtXPld9DHo97ZHi-rhYUi3uB6X_QP2aY/img.png?width=980" id="00fee" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="f020b8c05f36872ba2935c07261404f8" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="'Four Corners Canada': \u200bNorth America's other quadripoint, where the Northwest Territory, Nunavut, Saskatchewan and Manitoba meet." />
'Four Corners Canada': North America's other quadripoint, where the Northwest Territory, Nunavut, Saskatchewan and Manitoba meet.
Image reproduced by kind permission of HarperCollins<p>Quadripoints, where four political entities touch in a single point, are rare. The last international one was extinguished after World War I. There is a tangle of borders in southern Africa that comes close – but misses the mark by about 300 meters. At the sub-national level, the United States has its famous Four Corners. After a serious trek through the desert, tourists arrive at what must be one of the loneliest attractions in North America: the monument to the meeting point of Colorado, Utah, New Mexico and Arizona. </p><p><span></span>Well, that attraction has a potential competitor far north. On April 1 1999, when Canada created the territory of Nunavut, it also created a new quadripoint, where the new territory of Nunavut meets the now reduced Northwest Territories, plus the prairie provinces of Saskatchewan and Manitoba. '<a href="https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Four_Corners_(Canada)" target="_blank">Four Corners Canada</a>' already has its monument: the metal marker on the (former) Northwest-Saskatchewan-Manitoba tripoint. </p><p>However, pending an official land survey, some doubt remains as to whether the legal definition of Nunavut's border actually aligns with reality. Furthermore, 'Four Corners Canada' is located 1,200 km (725 miles) north by northwest from Winnipeg, which makes it vastly more remote than 'Four Corners USA'. So it's doubtful whether North America's newest quadripoint will ever become a tourist attraction. <br></p>
Looters and poachers<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzM4Mjk2MC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0MzIzNjczMX0.TPcNF6wC6byuiibkEaa1Xv2ljpHG1Z3sxBgtiYr_jAQ/img.png?width=980" id="c4ada" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="605689dc8256447af08e7c4c3e129c30" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="\u200bSo small and insignificant is this Russian exclave that it is left off most maps. But don't count on Russia abandoning it." />
So small and insignificant is this Russian exclave that it is left off most maps. But don't count on Russia abandoning it.
Image reproduced by kind permission of HarperCollins<p>Russia's most famous exclave is Kaliningrad, the northern half of what used to be East Prussia. After the disintegration of the USSR and the independence of the Baltic states, it got separated from Mother Russia – yet another burden for the fledgling post-communist state. Amid the confusion and economic collapse of the early 1990s, there was even some talk of just selling it back to Germany. <a href="https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2014/03/20/if-russia-gets-crimea-should-germany-get-kaliningrad-a33194" target="_blank">No more</a>. A resurgent Russia will no longer tolerate territorial shrinkage. The <a href="https://bigthink.com/strange-maps/663-nil-crimeariver-painting-putin-pouting" target="_blank">annexation of the Crimea</a> was a symbol of the turning tide. </p><p><span></span>So don't expect Russia to give up this little exclave either. Even though, unlike Kaliningrad, it has no strategic value. Sankovo-Medvezhye is a small fragment of Russia misplaced just across its border with Belarus – 35 km east of Gomel, 530 km southwest of Moscow. The two small villages making up the exclave were abandoned after Chernobyl. The population at present is zero. </p><p>Most Russians have never even heard of this particular exclave, and it's so small that it's left off most maps. The only people remotely interested in Sankovo-Medvezhye are looters, who by now have stripped both villages of almost anything of value; and poachers, who use the exclave as a sanctuary both from the Belarus authorities, who can't go there; and the Russian ones, who don't bother. <br></p>
Hamburg-by-the-Sea<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzM4Mjk2My9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxOTMzNTgxOX0.fGzTtjTB4LRtpqY19kGjtn__KZGWSxCtSis9yhLLP_Q/img.png?width=980" id="a3fbb" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="f2e10c4ed7f2fb78cb707fec98fd42a1" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="\u200bBremen has a coastal exclave? Then Hamburg wants one too!" />
Bremen has a coastal exclave? Then Hamburg wants one too!
Image reproduced by kind permission of HarperCollins<p>Germany is composed of 16 <em>Bundesländer</em> – federal states that typically are big enough to be a small European country on their own, like Bavaria or Brandenburg. Three, however, are Singapore-sized city-states: the capital Berlin, and the North Sea port cities of Hamburg and Bremen – the latter being smallest of all <em>Länder</em>. </p><p><span></span>Those two rival states are mirror images of each other: proud and ancient trading centers, landlocked in or between larger states, accessible to seagoing vessels via their respective rivers. Bremen has the Weser, Hamburg the Elbe. But zoom in further, as this map does, and they're even more alike. </p><p><span></span>At the 1815 Vienna Congress, Bremen obtained direct access to the sea in the shape of an exclave called Bremerhaven – big enough to be visible on most maps of Germany. (Actually, Bremen consists of three separate bits of land: Fehmoor is separated from Bremerhaven by a narrow strip of Lower Saxony. But let's not get distracted).</p><p>What's not so visible, is that Hamburg too has its own sea enclave. In fact, it has three: islands so small they usually don't appear on any map. Thinking it would need a coastal toehold to develop a deep-draft port, Hamburg acquired <a href="https://www.hamburg-tourism.de/das-ist-hamburg/stadtteile/neuwerk/" target="_blank">Neuwerk</a> (current population: 40) and its uninhabited sister island of Scharhörn after the Second World War. </p><p>Those deep-draft plans were eventually shelved, due to cost and environmental protests. A third island, Nigehörn, was created artificially to protect the bird sanctuary on Scharhörn. The three islands are still part of Hamburg, 120 km (75 miles) further up the Elbe, but they are now the anchors of a national park rather than a busy port. <br></p>
From no man's land to microstate<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzM4Mjk2NS9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxNzczMDQxMX0.r6i3Sm4dsHlZ4fj9SjbHCQs18NSlBP0l1ohXq_z7Pt4/img.png?width=980" id="c3a97" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="142b1ed2c886bf272dee38beda8f50b4" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="In a region fought over so bitterly, Siga Island presents a remarkable exception: it is claimed by neither Croatia nor Serbia." />
In a region fought over so bitterly, Siga Island presents a remarkable exception: it is claimed by neither Croatia nor Serbia.
Image reproduced by kind permission of HarperCollins<p>Never set a border in a river. The river will shift, and then you're stuck with a mess made by two lines meandering all over each other. For some prime examples, check out the U.S. states who trusted the Mississippi to provide a neat and easy demarcation between them. </p><p><span></span>It gets worse when international borders are involved, as is the case between Croatia and Serbia. Of course, that border wasn't international until Yugoslavia bloodily tore itself apart in the 1990s. Much of that border is formed by the Danube. And both countries have different opinions of how that river should be used to demarcate the border. </p><p><span></span>Right down the middle, Serbia says. Following old cadastral borders, Croatia maintains. Those cadastral borders follow a previous course of the river, which is why Croatia claims 10,000 hectares on the 'Serbian' side of the river. It also explains why Croatia doesn't claim the 2,000-hectare Siga Island on 'its' side of the Danube – an area not claimed by Serbia either.</p><p><span></span>And there you have it: terra nullius. That's legalese for No Man's Land. However, like nature, geopolitics abhors a vacuum. Rather than wait or both countries to come to a compromise, various parties have sought to lay claim to the grey zone between them, and proclaimed it to be the Free Republic of Liberland, or the Kingdom of Enclava. </p><p>How will this end? While our hearts are with the micro-nationalists trying to do something new here, attempts at secession have generally not gone down well in this part of the world. Get ready to migrate your dreams to cyberspace, Liberlanders. (<a href="https://liberland.org/en/" target="_blank">OK, check!</a>)<br></p>
Room(s) for the Resistance<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzM4Mjk2OC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYwOTQzOTg3N30.zivB3Dz8jm0fywQ8jlxdGceWKQnWWATDZNrmQRrfelc/img.png?width=980" id="21848" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="0714f6a2d5bbf09ab14dd0a8b0e19c00" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="\u200bDuring the Second World War, Hotel Arbez could simultaneously host both German solders (on the French side) and members of the French Resistance (on the Swiss side)." />
During the Second World War, Hotel Arbez could simultaneously host both German solders (on the French side) and members of the French Resistance (on the Swiss side).
Image reproduced by kind permission of HarperCollins<p>About 30 km (20 miles) north of Geneva, La Cure is a small village slap bang on the Franco-Swiss border. Quite literally so: half the village is French, the other half Swiss. The same goes for a bunch of buildings in town: the international border runs right through it. </p><p>One of those is the Hotel Arbez, and while that curiosity might have been a selling point for some of its earlier guests – the border passes through the double bed in the honeymoon suite, for example – during the Second World War, it became a major geopolitical fault line. While France was occupied by the Germans, Switzerland stayed neutral, independent and unoccupied.</p><p>It is said that during the war, on several occasions the French side of the hotel hosted German soldiers and officers, dining on the fine fare of the hotel's kitchen; while members of the French Resistance stayed in rooms on the Swiss side. Naturally, if the Germans had caught the Resistance fighters on the 'French' side of the hotel, it would have ended in an arrest, or worse: a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2Xu6T5gIns" target="_blank">BBC comedy</a>. But as long as they stayed on the Swiss side, they were untouchable – a very practical benefit of Switzerland's famed neutrality. <span></span></p>
A republic of monks<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzM4Mjk2OS9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzMDA2NDM2Mn0.XoQaDkyZs-1Xo-cujHSeTDNF_d3v_UyipQDWpDazjPc/img.png?width=980" id="394c7" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="ff22c40777660427fb02397fa9bd0e47" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="Athos is a monastic republic, with some peculiar rules. Only men are allowed - exceptions are made for female cats and chickens." />
Athos is a monastic republic, with some peculiar rules. Only men are allowed - exceptions are made for female cats and chickens.
Image reproduced by kind permission of HarperCollins<p>Greece is not one country, but two. The more familiar one, simply called 'Greece', is a medium-sized modern European democracy with its capital in Athens. The other is a religion-based microstate on the easternmost of the three peninsulas of Chalkidiki – the only country in the world inhabited only by men. Its name? <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mXl8C4-M_4" target="_blank">Mount Athos</a>. </p><p><span></span>Named after its highest peak, Athos is sometimes also simply called 'Holy Mountain', because of the 20 monasteries and 2,000 monks on its territory. The monks have been here since the 8th century and have survived centuries of war and occupation (not the exact same monks, obviously). The Greek constitution recognises the Monastic State as a self-governing territory of the Greek state. The governor it sends to Athos is merely an observer. </p><p>For Athos is run by a religious council, made up of one representative per monastery. It has an executive body of four members (the 'Holy Administration'), headed by a CEO (the 'protos'). The monasteries attract monks from all over the orthodox world; residence at Athos gets them automatic Greek citizenship. In order not to disturb the contemplative life of the monks, no females are allowed on Athos. This includes female animals, with two exceptions: hens (to lay eggs) and cats (to catch mice; although one suspects the mice are co-eds too). <br></p>
Where Tasmania meets Victoria<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzM4Mjk3MC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyODE5MzUzNH0.7Yp1jG6Mu_s3oExba9OK1cY06LXAvIw3gwzrkscMJug/img.png?width=980" id="7956c" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="2ad4fae249406dc801ce166f4a91f5fe" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="\u200bTasmania is Australia's only island state, yet it does share a land border with the rest of the country." />
Tasmania is Australia's only island state, yet it does share a land border with the rest of the country.
Image reproduced by kind permission of HarperCollins<p>A small island beyond the island-continent's south-eastern shore, Tasmania is Australia's afterthought; Down Under's own Down Under. It is the only state of Australia that is also an island. And yet Tasmania manages to share a land border with Victoria, the southernmost state on the Australian mainland. </p><p><span></span>It does so entirely by accident. When Tasmania's sea border with Victoria was drawn at a latitude of 39°12' South, it was thought the line crossed open water only. Upon closer inspection, however, the line did cross a tiny island, which an earlier survey had misplaced somewhat. </p><p>Too small and barren to be of any other interest, the rock, originally called North East Islet, was rechristened Boundary Islet, and its sole raison d'être now is to be a geopolitical footnote: the only land border of the island state of Tasmania, and the shortest of all land borders between Australian states: all of 85 m (93 yards). <br></p>
Asterix in the North-West Atlantic<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzM4Mjk3Mi9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NTU1Nzk4NX0.tYI0GZmKkN_83hodOmUFSKmQWBgExbjBUPB0Oy2gRpk/img.png?width=980" id="80ecb" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="92e31b6bb260da7681bcfe60ba248744" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="\u200bSt Pierre and Miquelon is the last surviving fragment of what was once the vast North American dominion of 'New France'." />
St Pierre and Miquelon is the last surviving fragment of what was once the vast North American dominion of 'New France'.
Image reproduced by kind permission of HarperCollins<p>Until the mid-18th century, it was the French who were winning North America. They controlled New Orleans in the south, Acadia in the north, and a vast, unbroken stretch of territory in between. Then the Brits kicked them out of Canada, courtesy of the French and Indian War (1754-63), and the Americans bought the remainder off Napoleon in the Louisiana Purchase (1803).</p><p>But did the French give up all their possessions in North America? No! Like Asterix's Gallic village that bravely holds out against the Roman invasion, there is one part of the formerly vast dominion of 'New France' that remains French to this day – St Pierre and Miquelon, two small islands in the North-West Atlantic, 25 km (15 miles) off the coast of Newfoundland (and 3,800 km - 2,350 miles - west of the Metropolitan France). </p><p>If it isn't weird enough to find a slice of France stuck on Canada's eastern seaboard, a look at the territory's Exclusive Economic Zone raises eyebrows even further. The EEZ is the part of the sea over which a state has special rights (without having total sovereignty). The size and shape of St Pierre and Miquelon's EEZ was long an object of dispute between Canada and France. In 1992, an international panel granted the islands the EEZ you see on this map. Extremely elongated, the 200 km (125 miles) long, 10 km (6 miles) wide zone has been compared to a key, a mushroom and (perhaps inevitably) a French <em>baguette</em>. <br></p><p>The reason given for the shape is that it would provide a corridor for French ships to have unhindered access to St Pierre and Miquelon from international waters. However, Canada later exercised its right to extend its own EEZ, stranding the baguette within Canadian waters. Game over, you might think; but only if you're not French.</p><p><br></p><p><em>Zoran Nikolic: </em><a href="https://www.harpercollins.co.uk/9780008351779/the-atlas-of-unusual-borders-discover-intriguing-boundaries-territories-and-geographical-curiosities/" target="_blank">The Atlas of Unusual Borders</a><em>, published by <a href="https://www.harpercollins.co.uk/" target="_blank">HarperCollins</a>. </em></p><p><span></span>Images reproduced with kind permission.</p><p><strong><span></span>Strange Maps #1033</strong></p><p><strong><span></span></strong><em>Got a strange map? Let me know at </em><a href="mailto:email@example.com">firstname.lastname@example.org</a><em>.</em></p>
Duke University researchers might have solved a half-century old problem.
- Duke University researchers created a hydrogel that appears to be as strong and flexible as human cartilage.
- The blend of three polymers provides enough flexibility and durability to mimic the knee.
- The next step is to test this hydrogel in sheep; human use can take at least three years.
Duke researchers have developed the first gel-based synthetic cartilage with the strength of the real thing. A quarter-sized disc of the material can withstand the weight of a 100-pound kettlebell without tearing or losing its shape.
Photo: Feichen Yang.<p>That's the word from a team in the Department of Chemistry and Department of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science at Duke University. Their <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/adfm.202003451" target="_blank">new paper</a>, published in the journal,<em> Advanced Functional Materials</em>, details this exciting evolution of this frustrating joint.<br></p><p>Researchers have sought materials strong and versatile enough to repair a knee since at least the seventies. This new hydrogel, comprised of three polymers, might be it. When two of the polymers are stretched, a third keeps the entire structure intact. When pulled 100,000 times, the cartilage held up as well as materials used in bone implants. The team also rubbed the hydrogel against natural cartilage a million times and found it to be as wear-resistant as the real thing. </p><p>The hydrogel has the appearance of Jell-O and is comprised of 60 percent water. Co-author, Feichen Yang, <a href="https://today.duke.edu/2020/06/lab-first-cartilage-mimicking-gel-strong-enough-knees" target="_blank">says</a> this network of polymers is particularly durable: "Only this combination of all three components is both flexible and stiff and therefore strong." </p><p> As with any new material, a lot of testing must be conducted. They don't foresee this hydrogel being implanted into human bodies for at least three years. The next step is to test it out in sheep. </p><p>Still, this is an exciting step forward in the rehabilitation of one of our trickiest joints. Given the potential reward, the wait is worth it. </p><p><span></span>--</p><p><em>Stay in touch with Derek on <a href="http://www.twitter.com/derekberes" target="_blank">Twitter</a>, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/DerekBeresdotcom" target="_blank">Facebook</a> and <a href="https://derekberes.substack.com/" target="_blank">Substack</a>. His next book is</em> "<em>Hero's Dose: The Case For Psychedelics in Ritual and Therapy."</em></p>
An algorithm may allow doctors to assess PTSD candidates for early intervention after traumatic ER visits.
- 10-15% of people visiting emergency rooms eventually develop symptoms of long-lasting PTSD.
- Early treatment is available but there's been no way to tell who needs it.
- Using clinical data already being collected, machine learning can identify who's at risk.
The psychological scars a traumatic experience can leave behind may have a more profound effect on a person than the original traumatic experience. Long after an acute emergency is resolved, victims of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) continue to suffer its consequences.
In the U.S. some 30 million patients are annually treated in emergency departments (EDs) for a range of traumatic injuries. Add to that urgent admissions to the ED with the onset of COVID-19 symptoms. Health experts predict that some 10 percent to 15 percent of these people will develop long-lasting PTSD within a year of the initial incident. While there are interventions that can help individuals avoid PTSD, there's been no reliable way to identify those most likely to need it.
That may now have changed. A multi-disciplinary team of researchers has developed a method for predicting who is most likely to develop PTSD after a traumatic emergency-room experience. Their study is published in the journal Nature Medicine.
70 data points and machine learning
Image source: Creators Collective/Unsplash
Study lead author Katharina Schultebraucks of Columbia University's Department Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons says:
"For many trauma patients, the ED visit is often their sole contact with the health care system. The time immediately after a traumatic injury is a critical window for identifying people at risk for PTSD and arranging appropriate follow-up treatment. The earlier we can treat those at risk, the better the likely outcomes."
The new PTSD test uses machine learning and 70 clinical data points plus a clinical stress-level assessment to develop a PTSD score for an individual that identifies their risk of acquiring the condition.
Among the 70 data points are stress hormone levels, inflammatory signals, high blood pressure, and an anxiety-level assessment. Says Schultebraucks, "We selected measures that are routinely collected in the ED and logged in the electronic medical record, plus answers to a few short questions about the psychological stress response. The idea was to create a tool that would be universally available and would add little burden to ED personnel."
Researchers used data from adult trauma survivors in Atlanta, Georgia (377 individuals) and New York City (221 individuals) to test their system.
Of this cohort, 90 percent of those predicted to be at high risk developed long-lasting PTSD symptoms within a year of the initial traumatic event — just 5 percent of people who never developed PTSD symptoms had been erroneously identified as being at risk.
On the other side of the coin, 29 percent of individuals were 'false negatives," tagged by the algorithm as not being at risk of PTSD, but then developing symptoms.
Image source: Külli Kittus/Unsplash
Schultebraucks looks forward to more testing as the researchers continue to refine their algorithm and to instill confidence in the approach among ED clinicians: "Because previous models for predicting PTSD risk have not been validated in independent samples like our model, they haven't been adopted in clinical practice." She expects that, "Testing and validation of our model in larger samples will be necessary for the algorithm to be ready-to-use in the general population."
"Currently only 7% of level-1 trauma centers routinely screen for PTSD," notes Schultebraucks. "We hope that the algorithm will provide ED clinicians with a rapid, automatic readout that they could use for discharge planning and the prevention of PTSD." She envisions the algorithm being implemented in the future as a feature of electronic medical records.
The researchers also plan to test their algorithm at predicting PTSD in people whose traumatic experiences come in the form of health events such as heart attacks and strokes, as opposed to visits to the emergency department.