Fewer teenagers in the United States used drugs in 2016 than in previous decades. The positive news comes from an annual survey of almost 45,500 U.S. students in grades eight, 10 and 12.

“There’s a lot of good news here,” says pediatrician Sharon Levy of Boston Children’s Hospital. Public health messages from pediatricians, educators and others seem to be sinking in, she says. “I think that’s fabulous. Substance use is one of the most important — yet modifiable — behavioral health issues of adolescents.”
Adolescents’ use of many of the substances, including alcohol and cigarettes, hit an all-time low since the survey, known as the Monitoring the Future study, began collecting data 42 years ago. Heroin, methamphetamines, inhalants and stimulants also hit lows this year.

E-cigarettes have been particularly concerning as more adolescents gave the new devices a try, reaching a high in 2015 (SN: 5/28/16, p. 4). For the first time, the number of students who vape is declining, the survey found. In 2015, 16.3 percent of 12th-graders reported vaping in the last 30 days. In 2016, that fell to 12.5. Similar declines were evident among eighth- and 10th-graders.
In a happy surprise, misuse of prescription opioid use decreased in the last five years among 12th–graders. The drop was “a big surprise,” particularly against a backdrop of a much wider opioid epidemic in the general population (SN: 9/3/16, p. 14), Nora Volkow, the director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse in Bethesda, Md., said December 13 at a news briefing.
The news isn’t all good, though. Marijuana bucked the declining trends, at least for 12th-graders. In 2016, about 6 percent of 12th-graders said they use marijuana daily — a number that hasn’t changed much in the last five years.

Researchers don’t yet know why the rates for many drugs are down, but one idea is that the drop in illegal drugs may stem in part from reductions in alcohol and tobacco use. “There is a connection there,” Lloyd Johnston, a social psychologist at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor who led the survey, said in the news briefing.

The survey and the information it produces is “extremely important,” Levy says, “but it’s not everything.” Other measures of kids’ drug use, such as rates of substance use disorders, will offer a fuller view of how adolescents interact with drugs, she says.

For the millions of people who have taken up the sport of rock climbing, a cliff face is a challenge, a vertical puzzle solved only with the proper placement of hands and feet. Look closely, though, and those crevices and cracks that provide hand- and footholds also provide homes for a variety of plants, invertebrates and other easily overlooked species.

People who participate in outdoor sports like rock climbing may not think about the environmental impact of what they’re doing. After all, how big of an impact can one person really have on a rock? But there is a potential for harm, notes ecologist Andrea Holzschuh of the University of Würzburg in Germany. Finding evidence of that harm, though, is a challenge — the features that make some cliffs fun to climb, or not, also make for complicated research.

Holzschuh became interested in the effects that climbers are having on the environment in part because she is a climber herself, partial to tackling rocks in the Frankenjura region of Germany, which is noted for having some of the best climbing in Europe. The plants, animals and other species that make the cliffs their home, she notes, are often specialists that have found ways to adapt and even thrive in the extreme conditions found on the rock face. They may be rare or completely absent from nearby spots, and they often are slow-growing and their numbers grow only in spurts.

And then come the climbers, who may trample what grows at the bottom of a cliff, dig out whatever is growing in a crevice to gain a better handhold, spread species not native to the area or taint the rock face with chalk, altering pH or nutrient conditions for whatever is growing there. Rock climbing isn’t quite as impact-free as some might assume.

But scientists haven’t really been able to adequately assess that impact. Holzschuh went looking for research on this topic and found only 22 studies that tested how rock climbing might affect plants or animals. She tossed out six of those studies because they failed to make comparisons with unclimbed areas or had other major design problems that made it impossible to tease out effects. The remaining 16 studies found a variety of impacts on organisms ranging from lichens to snails to cedar trees. Holzschuh’s review appears in the December Biological Conservation.

But what the review really highlights is just how difficult it is to study rock climbing’s potential impacts. Holzschuh says a big challenge is in finding appropriate unclimbed cliff faces to compare to those that rock climbers frequent — ones that share traits such as slope and how much sunlight the face gets. “Often, all cliffs in a regions that are attractive for climbers are climbed and only cliffs that do not resemble the climbed cliffs in all abiotic traits remain unclimbed,” she notes. “Then no reliable study can be conducted.”

And then, of course, there’s the inaccessibility of many cliffs and the difficulty in studying even the accessible ones. “How many people have these skills and the flexibility to work on these projects?” says Michael Tessler of the American Museum of Natural History and Fordham University. Plus, he notes that a subset of rock climbing called bouldering — in which climbers tackle boulders or short cliff faces measuring less than 3.5 meters high, without using safety ropes — is especially popular with younger people. “Professors inherently aren’t always young,” he notes.
Tessler and colleague Theresa Clark of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas published the first ever analysis attempting to quantify the impact of bouldering on the environment. This type of climbing has similar potential for ecosystem damage as roped rock climbing, they note, plus a couple of additional ones: Boulderers often clear the ground below of rocks and logs so that they can place crash pads in case of falls, and they may be more likely to trample anything at the top of a boulder or cliff, rather than coming directly down.

Tessler and Clark tried to measure the impact of climbers at bouldering routes in the Shawangunk Ridge, a popular climbing site in New York where Tessler climbs. They compared transects in climbed boulder routes with transects along nearby unclimbed sections of rock and found differences in lichen, moss and woody plants. None of this added up to a major threat, but conservation managers might want to monitor these activities in remote sites and shut down certain routes that are proving too popular — and potentially too harmful to whatever is growing there, Tessler and Clark suggest in the December Biological Conservation.

While we still can’t really say how much impact climbers might be having on the rocky environments they climb, there is a definite need for more scientists to strap on their climbing shoes and tackle the questions of climbing’s impact. (Try it! It’s lots of fun!) But climbers, too, can do their part, Holzschuh and Tessler say.

“I think climbers can easily minimize their impact on the cliff vegetation if they do not willingly remove vegetation from the cliff to ‘clean’ hand- and footholds in the climbing route. Climbers should not access the cliff plateau [and should] leave this cliff part completely undisturbed,” Holzschuh says. “At the cliff base, bags and gear should be laid down within a small area to reduce the effects of trampling.”

Tessler also has advice. “Boulderers should be aware that even infrequent climbing leaves some impression on rock-associated vegetation,” he says. “They should remove as little vegetation and soil when climbing and establishing climbs. Also, if a climb is wet, dirty or covered in vegetation, maybe go to another one. This is an easy way to ensure that some rock faces can stay more natural.”

And if climbing is restricted because, say, rare birds are breeding there, rock climbers should obey the restriction and go climb somewhere else, Holzschuh says. There are plenty of other cliffs to be conquered.

A team of scientists may have given hydrogen a squeeze strong enough to turn it into a metal. But critics vigorously dispute the claim.

Researchers from Harvard University report that under extremely high pressures hydrogen became reflective — one of the key properties of a metal. The feat required compressing hydrogen to 4.9 million times atmospheric pressure, the scientists report online January 26 in Science.

If correct, the result would be the culmination of a decades-long search for a material that could have unusual properties such as superconductivity — the ability to conduct electricity without resistance.
But physicist Eugene Gregoryanz of the University of Edinburgh, who works on similar experiments, decries the study’s publication as a failure of the journal’s review process. Given the evidence presented in the paper, Gregoryanz is skeptical that the claimed pressures were actually reached and notes that the researchers presented results from only one experiment. “How is it possible to do only one experiment and claim such a big thing?” he says.

Physicist Alexander Goncharov of the Carnegie Institution for Science in Washington, D.C., also takes issue with the researchers’ conclusions. “It’s not shown whether they have hydrogen at all at high pressure,” Goncharov says.

Not everyone is so skeptical. “I think there’s a good chance that it’s correct,” says theoretical physicist David Ceperley of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The pressure at which the hydrogen became reflective is about where theoretical physicists have calculated that a metal should form, Ceperley says.

Theorists’ calculations also indicate that metallic hydrogen could be a high-temperature superconductor (SN: 8/20/16, p. 18). Most superconductors work only in extreme cold, but metallic hydrogen might function even at room temperature — higher than any other known superconductor. If so, its discovery would raise hopes that superconducting metallic hydrogen could be used in power lines, making transmission of electricity vastly more efficient.

To put the pressure on hydrogen, scientists capture it as a gas between the tips of two diamonds and squeeze them together. It’s no easy task. “The problem in making metallic hydrogen has been that the predicted pressures have been very high,” says physicist Isaac Silvera of Harvard University, a coauthor of the study. “Diamonds always break before you can obtain those pressures.”
To stave off breakage, the scientists smoothed the surface of the diamonds to remove any defects and covered the gems in a thin layer of aluminum oxide to prevent hydrogen from diffusing inside and creating cracks. The researchers also cooled the setup to temperatures of 83 kelvins (−190° Celsius) or below. As the scientists ratcheted up the pressure, the hydrogen first turned black, indicating a possible semiconducting phase, then became reflective, indicating a metal. The metallic hydrogen could be either a solid or a liquid, Silvera says.

But such experiments are tricky — only a few teams of researchers in the world are capable of performing them. One of the pitfalls can be that the hydrogen escapes from the chamber without the scientists realizing it. However, Silvera says, “We’re sure we have hydrogen in there.”

Some previous metallic hydrogen experiments have monitored hydrogen as the pressure is ramped up to help ensure that the hydrogen hasn’t escaped and to study its evolution. To do so, scientists use a technique called Raman spectroscopy, which involves shining a laser through the diamonds and observing the scattered light. But at pressures this high, lasers could cause the diamonds to break, Silvera says. So the researchers used lasers only after the sample had reached the metallic state.

Silvera’s group is not the first to announce the discovery of metallic hydrogen. Earlier claims of finding the metal have been overturned (SN: 12/17/11, p. 9). “It’s not the last word,” says Ceperley. “It should encourage all the other groups to come out and try to reproduce it.”

A roughly 540-million-year-old creature that may have once skimmed shorelines was a real oddball.

Dozens of peculiar, roundish fossils discovered in what is now South China represent the earliest known deuterostomes, a gigantic category of creatures that includes everything from humans to sea cucumbers.

No bigger than a pinhead, the fossils have wrinkly, baglike bodies and gaping mouths that are pleated around the edges like an accordion, researchers report January 30 in Nature. Unlike most other deuterostomes, the animals don’t seem to have an anus. Instead, the ancient oddities, named Saccorhytus coronarius, may have leaked waste (and other bodily fluids like mucus and sex cells) out of tiny holes lining their sides. These holes may have later evolved into gill slits.

A tough, flexible skin would have protected Saccorhytus as it wriggled through grains of dirt, the authors suggest. The find supports previous suggestions that the earliest deuterostomes were actually a kind of water-dwelling worm.

Are you feeling the pressure of Valentine’s Day and in need of advice on how to find someone special? The animal world has some advice for you.

Make sure you look nice.
There’s no need to go for an entire makeover, but looking your best is usually a good idea when on the search for a partner. Male black-and-white snub-nosed monkeys appear to have taken a lesson from Revlon — they go for the rouge-lipped look during the mating season. Those with bright, red lips tend to be surrounded by females.
Learn to dance …
As anyone who has ever watched John Travolta in Saturday Night Fever knows, having the right dance moves can make finding a mate easier. For some animals, it’s essential. That’s true for male peacock spiders, which raise colorful flaps on their behinds and wave them while lifting their third legs in an adorable dance aimed at luring a mate. And if a guy doesn’t have the best moves or try hard enough, females don’t just reject him — they get aggressive.

… and how to flirt.
Even if you’re an expert dancer, you’ll probably need to do at least a little flirting. It may be a bit more subtle than torrent frogs, though, who turn flirting into a big production. A male frog will get a female’s attention by first calling out and puffing up his vocal sacs. Then he’ll shake his hands and feet and wiggle his toes. If he’s successful, the female will let him know with a special call.

Attend a party.
The best place to put all of this on display is, of course, a party! And there are parties everywhere, even at the bottom of the ocean. Scientists exploring a seamount off the Pacific coast of Panama in 2015 found an enormous party of small, red crabs swarming all over each other. Such large aggregations are common among crab species and may be linked to reproduction.

Practice, practice, practice.
Once you’ve landed a partner, you might want to serenade him or her with the perfect love song. But first you’ll need to practice, just like great reed warblers (probably) do. Males spend their entire winter vacation singing the songs they seem to use to woo the ladies come spring. All that singing cuts into time the guys could spend foraging for food or resting, but that practice might pay off because female warblers prefer males that sing more complex tunes.

Keep an eye on the competition.
You may not be the only one interested in your partner, so make like a peacock and check out your competition. Peacocks fan out their feathers to lure the ladies, but females only pay attention to what’s happening at the bottom of the show, studies have revealed. Males do likewise, keeping their gaze tuned to the bottom of the competition’s display.

Bring a gift.
You probably don’t need to worry that your partner will go cannibal, but that doesn’t mean you can’t take a hint from a species where that does happen. When approaching a female, male nursery spiders are smart to bring a gift of a big dead insect wrapped up in silk. The gift will not only keep the female busy while the male mates with her, but it can also double as a shield if she sees him as a potential meal rather than a mate.

Three high-energy neutrinos have been spotted traveling in tandem.

The IceCube Neutrino Observatory in Antarctica detected the trio of lilliputian particles on February 17, 2016. This is the first time the experiment has seen a triplet of neutrinos that all seemed to come from the same place in the sky and within 100 seconds of one another. Researchers report the find February 20 on arXiv.org.

Physicists still don’t know where high-energy neutrinos are born. The three neutrinos’ proximity in time and space suggests the particles came from the same source, such as a flaring galaxy or an exploding star. But the scientists couldn’t rule out the possibility of a fluke — the triplet could simply have been the result of accidental alignment between unassociated neutrinos.

Eight different telescopes followed up on the neutrino triplet, checking for some sign of the particles’ origins. The telescopes, which searched for gamma rays, X-rays and other wavelengths of light, found nothing clearly associated with the particles. But scientists were able to rule out some possible explanations, like a nearby stellar explosion caused by the collapse of a dying star.

Here’s one good reason why people often take medications and use health products that don’t live up to expectations or just don’t work — digital word of mouth.

The reviews can be glowing. Take this scuttlebutt about a cholesterol treatment: “I have been using this product for 2 years. Within the first 3 – 4 months my cholesterol was down 30 points. Just got cholesterol tested last week: down from 245 to 196.”

That’s incredible. It might even be true. But the big picture is alarming: Patients’ online reviews of three over-the-counter drugs — two for lowering cholesterol and one for losing weight — greatly exaggerate how well these substances actually work for most people, says psychologist Mícheál de Barra of the University of Aberdeen in Scotland. Online reviewers portray these medications as working three to six times better than they do in clinical trials that randomly assign drugs or placebos to broad samples of volunteers, he says.

“To learn what works in medicine, you need systematically collected data, usually randomized clinical trials,” de Barra says. “It’s very risky to rely on observations and word of mouth, whether it’s electronic or in person.”

Online reviewers probably aren’t lying, at least not in most cases. Neither are online review readers unrealistically optimistic about health treatments. The problem is that people who benefit most from a medication are especially apt to post their experiences online. Review readers get bamboozled by a wave of positive recommendations that don’t accurately represent how a drug works, or doesn’t work, for people in general.

The duping doesn’t end there. Direct word of mouth about medical treatments, as well as glowing testimonials about health products in advertisements, also traffic in positively skewed information.

In some cases, science does, too. Researchers have recently raised alarms about the “file-drawer problem,” in which studies that find no statistical effects are not published (SN: 5/19/12, p. 26). Published studies reporting positive effects then look unjustifiably bulletproof.

Clinical trials can tilt results in other ways as well. Authors of published trials often fail to preregister details of what they plan to study and how they’ll measure it, enabling data manipulation, selective reporting of results and self-serving interpretations of findings. Clinical trials report patients’ “average” responses to, say, an anticholesterol drug, but do a poor job of predicting which individuals will benefit from that treatment. “Published evidence from randomized trials is already an amalgam of evidence-based medicine and hearsay,” notes Stanford University epidemiologist John Ioannidis.
Online reviews are just old-fashioned word of mouth with a global bullhorn. But they offer one way to quantify the positive bias inherent in so much communication about medical treatments. Patients’ medication reviews that include numerical information, such as cholesterol levels before and after taking an anticholesterol drug, represent what Ioannidis calls “evidence-based hearsay.” Even if patients’ reviews rate treatments with a star system rather than including quantified measures of some kind, those opinions become powerful hearsay evidence for other patients, Ioannidis suspects.

De Barra evaluated 908 online reviews of two cholesterol reduction products, Benecol caramel smart chews and CholestOff, written on or before March 18, 2015. He also assessed 767 reviews of a weight-loss drug, Alli (orlistat), written on or before February 28, 2015.

Benecol reviewers reported a not-too-shabby average cholesterol decline of 45 milligrams per deciliter, versus a small average decline of 14 milligrams per deciliter in nine clinical trials. Respective numbers for CholestOff were 31 milligrams per deciliter and 13 milligrams per deciliter. Alli reviewers reported an average weight loss of about 10 kilograms after taking the drug for three months, versus an average of about two or three kilograms in two clinical trials. That disparity widened slightly after taking Alli for seven months.

Each drug garnered mainly positive reviews, some reporting effects far larger than the average, peppered with a few pans, De Barra reports in the March Social Science & Medicine.

What’s particularly concerning is that these three medications displayed small or negligible effects in clinical trials that probably already inflated how well the drugs work, Ioannidis says. So people searching for help in lowering cholesterol or shedding pounds may instead be getting a massive dose of disappointment from online reviews.

Online reviews can also exaggerate a treatment’s worst effects, whether real or alleged. Evidence-based hearsay may be particularly catchy online and in person when it’s frightening, de Barra suspects.

The anti-vaccination movement provides a potent example, due in part to the success of vaccines. When people face no immediate threat from measles or other infectious diseases, anti-vaccine stories may go viral, so to speak, thanks to misapplied but deeply felt intuitions. Two cognitive scientists, Helena Miton of Central European University in Budapest and Hugo Mercier of the Cognitive Sciences Institute in Bron, France, proposed this scenario in the November 2015 Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

However medical treatments acquire halos or horns, only well-conducted, transparent clinical trials can identify effective medical treatments, such as childhood vaccinations, and their potential side effects, Ioannidis says. But an ominous research trend is gathering steam, he warns. Researchers, professional societies, funders and lobbyists increasingly push to replace clinical trials of randomly selected volunteers with studies of interventions for select samples of people who eat certain foods, take certain drugs or behave in certain ways. The latter investigations may inflate a treatment’s effects even more than online patient reviews do, Ioannidis asserts.

Perhaps a new wave of studies showing how evidence-based hearsay misrepresents many medications will be just what the doctor ordered to resuscitate evidence-based medicine, he muses.

Remnants of a royal palace in southern Mexico, dating to between around 2,300 and 2,100 years ago, come from what must have been one of the Americas’ earliest large, centralized governments, researchers say.

Excavations completed in 2014 at El Palenque uncovered a palace with separate areas where a ruler conducted affairs of state and lived with his family, say archaeologists Elsa Redmond and Charles Spencer, both of the American Museum of Natural History in New York City. Only a ruler of a bureaucratic state could have directed construction of this all-purpose seat of power, the investigators conclude the week of March 27 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The royal palace, the oldest such structure in the Valley of Oaxaca, covered as many as 2,790 square meters, roughly half the floor area of the White House. A central staircase connected to an inner courtyard that probably served as a place for the ruler and his advisors to reach decisions, hold feasts and — based on human skull fragments found there — perform ritual sacrifices, the scientists suggest. A system of paved surfaces, drains and other features for collecting rainwater runs throughout the palace, a sign that the entire royal structure was built according to a design, the researchers say.

El Palenque’s palace contains no tombs. Its ancient ruler was probably buried off-site, at a ritually significant location, Redmond and Spencer say.

A newly discovered glass frog from Ecuador’s Amazon lowlands is giving researchers a window into its heart.

Hyalinobatrachium yaku has a belly so transparent that the heart, kidneys and urine bladder are clearly visible, an international team of researchers reports May 12 in ZooKeys. Researchers identified H. yaku as a new species using field observations, recordings of its distinct call and DNA analyses of museum and university specimens.

Yaku means “water” in Kichwa, a language spoken in Ecuador and parts of Peru where H. yaku may also live. Glass frogs, like most amphibians, depend on streams. Egg clutches dangle on the underside of leaves, then hatch, and the tadpoles drop into the water below. But the frogs are threatened by pollution and habitat destruction, the researchers write. Oil extraction, which occurs in about 70 percent of Ecuador’s Amazon rainforest, and expanding mining activities are both concerns.

When faced with rushing floodwaters, fire ants are known to build two types of structures. A quickly formed raft lets the insects float to safety. And once they find a branch or tree to hold on to, the ants might form a tower up to 30 ants high, with eggs, brood and queen tucked safely inside. Neither structure requires a set of plans or a foreman ant leading the construction, though. Instead, both structures form by three simple rules:

If you have an ant or ants on top of you, don’t move.
If you’re standing on top of ants, keep moving a short distance in any direction.
If you find a space next to ants that aren’t moving, occupy that space and link up.
“When in water, these rules dictate [fire ants] to build rafts, and the same rules dictate them to build towers when they are around a stem [or] branch,” notes Sulisay Phonekeo of the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta. He led the new study, published July 12 in Royal Society Open Science.

To study the fire ants’ construction capabilities, Phonekeo and his Georgia Tech colleagues collected ants from roadsides near Atlanta. While covered in protective gear, the researchers dug up ant mounds and placed them in buckets lined with talc powder so the insects couldn’t climb out. Being quick was a necessity because “once you start digging, they’ll … go on attack mode,” Phonekeo says. The researchers then slowly flooded the bucket until the ants floated out of the dirt and formed a raft that could be easily scooped out.

In the lab, the researchers placed ants in a dish with a central support, then filmed the insects as they formed a tower. The support had to be covered with Teflon, which the ants could grab onto but not climb without help. Over about 25 minutes, the ants would form a tower stretching up to 30 mm high. (The ants themselves are only 2 to 6 mm long.)
The towers looked like the Eiffel Tower or the end of a trombone, with a wide base and narrow top. And the towers weren’t static, like rafts of ants are. Instead, videos of the ant towers showed that the towers were constantly sinking and being rebuilt.

Peering into the transparent Petri dish from below revealed that the ants build tunnels in the base of a tower, which they use to exit the base before climbing back up the outside.

“The ants clear a path through the ants underneath much like clearing soil,” Phonekeo says. Ants may be using the tunnels to remove debris from inside the towers. And the constant sinking and rebuilding may give the ants a chance to rest without the weight of any compatriots on their backs, he says.

To find out what was happening inside the tower, the researchers fed half their ants a liquid laced with radioactive iodide and then filmed the insects using a camera that captured X-rays. In the film, radioactive ants appeared as dark dots, and the researchers could see that some of those dots didn’t move, but others did.

The team then turned to the three rules that fire ants follow when building a raft and realized that they also applied to towers. But there was also a fourth rule: A tower’s stability depends on the ants that have attached themselves to the rod. The top row of ants on the rod aren’t stable unless they form a complete ring. So to get a taller tower, there needs to be a full ring of ants gripping to the rod and each other.

That such simple rules could form two completely different structures is inspiring to Phonekeo. “It makes me wonder about the possibilities of living structures that these ants can build if we can design the right environment for them.”