This total solar eclipse looked strangely golden — here’s why

Last week’s total solar eclipse offered more than a spectacular view. It also produced an unusual atmospheric effect that gave the Sun’s outer atmosphere a striking golden appearance.

During a total solar eclipse, the Moon completely blocks the bright disk of the Sun, making the much fainter solar corona visible. The corona is the Sun’s extremely hot outer atmosphere, and during most eclipses it appears white or silvery. Some people watching last week’s eclipse did see this familiar pearly color. In Spain, however, observers were treated to something different. The corona took on an unusually rich golden hue.

Why the Eclipse Looked Golden

The timing of the eclipse played an important role. In Spain, totality occurred while the setting Sun was already close to the horizon. When the Sun sits that low in the sky, its light must travel through much more of Earth’s atmosphere before reaching an observer.

Along that longer path, molecules in the air scatter shorter wavelengths of visible light, especially blue. This is the same basic process that helps make sunsets appear orange and red. With more blue light removed, the warmer colors that remain become much more noticeable.

Conditions that day added another layer to the effect. An unusually large amount of smoke in the air from nearby forest fires acted like an additional atmospheric filter. Smoke particles scattered even more of the remaining blue wavelengths, intensifying the golden tones in the visible light surrounding the eclipsed Sun.

A Pink Solar Prominence Stood Out

The remarkable featured image was created using multiple exposures and HDR processing. HDR, or high dynamic range imaging, combines exposures with different brightness levels so that both very bright and very faint details can be preserved in a single image. The photograph was captured last week from Benavente, Spain.

Not everything around the Sun was transformed into gold. A large prominence remained visible along the Sun’s left edge. Solar prominences are enormous structures of glowing plasma that extend outward from the Sun’s surface and are often shaped by powerful magnetic fields.

This prominence emitted strongly in light associated with hydrogen, allowing its original bright pink color to survive despite the atmospheric filtering. Against the unusually golden corona, the vivid pink structure made an already rare eclipse scene even more striking.

Share Button

‘I’d love a normal life, but being a 17-year-old carer means sacrifices’

Young carers face huge disadvantages growing up – one teenager explains what life is like.

Share Button

Weekly type 2 diabetes jab could replace daily injections

Hundreds of thousands of people with type 2 diabetes could get access to a new weekly insulin jab to replace daily injections.

Share Button

Vapes could lead to health harms in children, doctors warn

A Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health has published a report with concerns vaping is a gateway to smoking

Share Button

What is postpartum psychosis and why is it central in the Lindsay Clancy trial?

Clancy is accused of killing her three children in Massachusetts in 2023 and her defence team point to severe postpartum mental illness.

Share Button

Salmonella outbreak: What we know so far

Hundreds have fallen ill with salmonella infections in an outbreak linked to imported eggs.

Share Button

Channel 4’s Great ADHD Myth Documentary Dramatically Divides Viewers

A documentary questioning whether attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a genuine condition or a social construct has aired on Channel 4 – and it’s proven predictably divisive.

The show, titled The Great ADHD Myth?, has prompted a wave of responses online from doctors, charities and people with the disorder who are concerned it will contribute to stigma surrounding the condition.

A reactionary survey by the charity ADHD UK in the wake of the documentary revealed that (at the time of writing), of 1,566 people who watched the show, 92% believe it has increased stigma surrounding ADHD, while 93% do not believe the show was fair in its representation of the condition.

ADHD UK’s CEO and co-founder, Henry Shelford, told HuffPost UK: “We are shocked by this programme. The fact it got commissioned at all speaks to the stigma around ADHD – a stigma that is now likely to get worse because of this show.”

The charity had previously penned an open letter to Channel 4 urging it to make a series of changes to the documentary before its release, including a review of the title and for the broadcaster to “make clear on screen where contributors’ views sit relative to mainstream clinical consensus”.

What was Channel 4’s ADHD documentary about?

The documentary followed NHS psychiatrist and Daily Mail columnist, Dr Max Pemberton, as he spoke to medical experts who questioned the conventional narrative around ADHD.

One such expert, Dr Iona Heath, the former president of the Royal College of General Practitioners, said: “It’s certainly not a medical condition as far as I’m concerned.” Another child psychiatrist said: “In 100 years’ time people are going to wonder, ‘How could we be so gullible?’”

The show posed a number of questions including whether ADHD is a disorder or social construct, how it should be treated (including whether diet and lifestyle changes could help), whether medication is the right approach and who benefits from increasing diagnoses.

Dr Pemberton – who remains certain he doesn’t have ADHD – underwent a private assessment (costing £1,200) and was diagnosed with combined ADHD and a prescription for medication.

The documentary also followed a family who wanted to see whether holistic lifestyle changes could eliminate their 10-year-old son’s use of ADHD medication. The pills “take my fun-ness away”, he said, however the programme noted at the end he did go back on them.

ADHD UK’s survey found 80% of those surveyed said it wasn’t “responsible” for a broadcaster to film a 10-year-old stopping his ADHD medication for television.

In response, Channel 4 told HuffPost UK: “The welfare of the boy and his family were of paramount importance both before, during and after the production process. An independent doctor, his GP, and a health and safety company were consulted.

“Advice was also taken from three independent psychiatrists on the medication break. This programme was produced in compliance with the Ofcom Broadcasting Code.”

The Times’ review of the show called its arguments “convincing, or at least the start of a necessary discussion”, although they did note “there was no real counter-argument offered to the idea of ADHD as a ‘myth’”.

Meanwhile the Guardian said Dr Pemberton “answers his questions convincingly”, highlighting the remedies proposed at the end, such as changing diet, screen and activity levels first, adapting schools to children’s needs, and making medication the last resort “seem neither radical nor uncompassionate”.

Both publications gave the doc four stars.

The show sparked backlash from people with ADHD

The NHS says ADHD is a “complex neurodevelopmental disorder, which starts in childhood and often persists into adulthood” and “is associated with significant impairment”. It’s also recognised by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE).

It is marked by a persistent pattern (at least six months) of inattention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity that has a direct negative impact in more than one setting – ie. home, school, work – on academic, occupational, or social functioning.

Shelford, who has ADHD, said the latest Channel 4 documentary “is a travesty in its missed opportunity to help slay myths around ADHD; instead, it has added to them”.

He said ADHD “can be extraordinarily tough” and pointed to UCL-led research which showed UK adults with diagnosed ADHD have a shorter life expectancy. There was a reduction in life expectancy for men with diagnosed ADHD of between 4.5 and nine years, and between 6.5 and 11 years for women.

“Our failure to support people with ADHD should be a national scandal – instead we’re getting TV shows undermining the disorder,” he said.

“We have already complained to Ofcom and will be following up with a more detailed complaint.” The charity has also encouraged others to make complaints to the regulator.

“We are worried that this will cost lives by putting people in need off getting an ADHD assessment and from getting support,” added Shelford.

Others were quick to share their thoughts on the controversial documentary on social media after it aired.

Clinical psychologist Dr Emily Compton-Smith wrote on Instagram: “We should absolutely be able to discuss diagnosis, and where things could be improved.”

That said, she was “troubled” by “how one-sided the programme felt,” she continued, adding that “what felt missing … was the voice of the people actually living it”.

She also aired concerns that “many people will watch it and come away more sceptical of ADHD, while people with ADHD will once again be left feeling like they need to justify themselves”.

Adam Dance, the Liberal Democrat MP for Yeovil, who also has ADHD, shared a cross-party letter which he’d sent to Channel 4, saying he is “deeply concerned by the framing and language used to promote the documentary and by the potential consequences for people with ADHD and their families”.

Meanwhile others praised the show as “fantastic” and “inspirational”.

One in five (20%) people who watched the show and responded to ADHD UK’s survey said the programme had caused them ‘severe’ distress, with 38% saying it caused ‘significant’ distress.

Share Button

Putin Aide Claims He ‘Feels Sorry’ For The UK After Russian Embassy’s Threats

A top aide to Vladimir Putin has bizarrely declared he “feels sorry” for the UK after Britain was threatened by the Russian Embassy in London over its support for Ukraine.

Moscow’s representatives in the UK warned of the “consequences” following confirmation that British-made drones had been used in recent Ukrainian attacks in Russia.

The embassy claimed Britain was “deliberately opting for an escalation of the Ukraine crisis,” and said the “deeper its involvement in the conflict… the higher the price it will pay”.

UK prime minister Andy Burnham remained unperturbed by the threats on Tuesday, telling reporters that the UK was “providing support so that Ukraine can defend itself and that’s been the British position all the way through this conflict, by previous prime ministers – it remains the case with me”.

Asked about the spat with the UK on Wednesday, Russia’s foreign minister Sergei Lavrov tried to deliver yet another threat as he again suggested Britain is directly involved in the war.

He told the media: “I feel sorry for the United Kingdom, if it is going to stand with Ukraine until the very end.

“As for the substance of our Embassy’s comment, it means only one thing: President Vladimir Putin has warned of our right to act in any area of the world’s oceans, should anyone encroach on our interests or our property.

“We have exactly the same right to regard the proudly announced direct involvement of British missile forces in strikes against the Russian Federation as participation in the war. With all the consequences that entails.”

His remarks come after a former deputy foreign minister of Russia told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that many in Moscow interpret the recent strikes from Ukraine as proof the UK is “part of the war”.

“The situation now is very dangerous, because the tension of conflict in Ukraine really is increasing,” Andrei Federov added. “The coming couple of months will face this tension, this escalation which can bring us to totally different situation unlike ever before.”

Listen to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Share Button

Screen Time Might Have Some Brain Benefits For Kids, Study Suggests

Children’s screen time has (rightly) received plenty of scrutiny of late.

We know that excessive use of screens can impact concentration levels and negatively impact academic outcomes. Studies have also linked it to poor language development, as well as problems with development, including obesity, sleep disturbances, depression, and anxiety.

But what about the impact on brain function? Well, a new study from Finland found kids who had higher amounts of screen time during childhood ended up with better cognitive processing in their teen years.

Cognitive processing refers to the mental functions which are linked to thinking, learning, memory and executive function.

Researchers said the findings suggest screen time can support children’s and adolescents’ cognitive processing. But they stressed a key consideration here is what kind of things children do during their screen time.

The findings are based on an eight-year follow-up of the PANIC study on children’s physical activity and nutrition. The study involved 124 girls and 136 boys, whose average age was 15.

Physical activity and sedentary behaviour were measured by a device that combined heart rate and movement measurements and also by a survey questionnaire, while learning, attention and working memory were also assessed.

Not all screen time is equal.
Not all screen time is equal.

Doctoral researcher Petri Jalanko, from the University of Jyväskylä, said children should be encouraged to use screens in ways that promote active thinking, problem-solving, creativity and learning.

Parents shouldn’t just see screen time as harmful, he added, but should seek balance between physical activity and screen time that promotes active thinking.

The research tracks with previous research on brain function and screen time. A 2023 study of nearly 12,000 children in the United States found no evidence that screen time impacted brain function or wellbeing.

A study in older adults, meanwhile, found active screen use was generally associated with better cognitive outcomes, particularly in memory, executive function, and attention.

Passive screen use, on the other hand, was linked to poorer outcomes, including verbal memory and global cognition declines.

The latest findings come after a survey found almost one-quarter (24%) of parents of three‑ to five‑year‑olds find it hard to control their child’s screen time, and 98% of two‑year‑olds watch screens every day.

In the UK, the government has issued guidance on screen time for under-fives, suggesting under twos should avoid screen time other than for shared activities that encourage bonding, interaction and conversation (ie. FaceTiming family).

Meanwhile two- to five-year-olds should stick to no more than one hour of screen time a day, and screen time should be avoided at mealtimes and in the hour before bed, so as not to disrupt sleep.

Watching screens with an engaged adult where parents talk and ask questions has been linked to better cognitive development than solo use.

Slow-paced content is also considered far better for development than fast-paced social media-style videos.

Paediatrician Dr Joel Warsh, aka Dr Gator on social media, previously shared in his newsletter that he tells parents to ask four questions when it comes to the impact of screen time on their kids.

These are:

  • Is my child sleeping well?
  • Are they able to focus without screens?
  • Do they play independently?
  • And how do they behave when the screen is taken away?

If their sleep, focus and ability to play independently is on track, and they don’t have meltdowns or angry outbursts when screens are taken away, this is a positive sign.

The paediatrician noted that “sometimes it’s not about the number of hours” but rather the effect of screen time on our kids that we should pay attention to.

Share Button

Coffee drinkers have less fat, more muscle, and surprising hormone differences

Coffee is consumed around the world every day, and earlier research has associated coffee drinking with a reduced risk of conditions including type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Scientists still do not fully understand the biological processes that might explain those connections. Now, new research from Finland suggests that regular coffee consumption is associated with healthier body composition, favorable metabolic markers, and distinct patterns involving sex hormones in men and women.

Researchers at the University of Oulu analyzed information from 2,264 people who were 46 years old and taking part in the Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1966. The team investigated how participants’ usual coffee intake related to circulating metabolites, indicators of cardiometabolic risk, and sex hormone levels.

Coffee Drinkers Had Less Fat and More Muscle

People who consumed more coffee tended to have lower levels of both total body fat and visceral fat, along with greater skeletal muscle mass. These differences appeared even though participants with higher and lower coffee intake had a similar body mass index (BMI).

Higher coffee consumption was also associated with lower circulating concentrations of branched-chain amino acids in both men and women. When chronically elevated, these biomarkers have previously been associated with insulin resistance and a greater risk of developing type 2 diabetes.

Coffee Intake Was Linked to Different Hormone Patterns

Some of the clearest differences appeared among men. Greater coffee consumption was associated with a more favorable glucose-insulin profile, higher levels of total and bioavailable testosterone, and greater concentrations of sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG). However, free testosterone and the free androgen index were modestly lower.

The hormonal associations were less extensive in women. Higher coffee consumption was mainly associated with increased SHBG and lower measures of free androgens.

“Coffee is consumed by millions of people every day, yet we still know surprisingly little about how it relates to our metabolism and hormones. What stood out in our findings was a distinct hormonal signature that didn’t disappear even after we took into account BMI and lifestyle factors, with several of these associations differing between men and women,” says Luca Verroest, lead author of the study and Doctoral Researcher at the University of Oulu.

Hormones Could Offer a Clue to Coffee’s Health Links

The findings raise the possibility that hormonal pathways could help explain some of the previously observed relationship between coffee consumption and metabolic health. Because the research was observational, however, it cannot establish that drinking coffee directly caused any of the biological differences identified in the study.

The setting also makes the research especially relevant. Finland ranks among the world’s highest coffee-consuming countries, with average annual consumption of approximately 11.8 kilograms (26 pounds) per person.

Researchers say the results offer a starting point for studies designed to determine whether coffee itself produces these biological changes and, if so, which compounds may be responsible. Scientists are currently investigating these questions using animal models, with the longer-term aim of moving toward human intervention studies.

Additional research will be necessary before the findings can be used to shape dietary recommendations.

The study, “Associations of habitual coffee intake with testosterone and cardiometabolic markers: the Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1966 study,” was published in the European Journal of Nutrition.

Share Button