Here, thanks to Milkshake over at Org Prep Daily, is an example of what the scientific literature is slowly turning into under the onslaught of chatbots. The Royal Society of Chemistry journal Sustainable Energy and Fuels has a paper in it that's been up for a while (published in August of 2024) with the unremarkable title of "Critical insights into eutectic molten hydroxide electrolysis for sustainable green hydrogen production". It's not a topic that I pay that much attention to, and it's not a journal that I think I've ever read a paper from anyway. So why am I noting it here?

Well, try to read the thing. Just try. It starts off sounding pedestrian but sane, but that doesn't last:

Embarking on a journey at the intersection of innovation and sustainability, this research review delves into the realm of hydrogen gas production through a lens of unprecedented possibilities. Driven by concerns over environmental impact and the ever-increasing demand for clean energy, the focus shifts towards the electrochemical process of splitting steam for hydrogen production via eutectic molten hydroxide electrolysis. This exploration is not merely a scientific pursuit; it is a quest to redefine our energy landscape. Imagine a novel reference electrode, a stable companion crafted from the fusion of Ni/Ni(OH)₂ and an ionic membrane. . .Through meticulous exploration and theoretical contemplation, this review sets out to redefine the boundaries of hydrogen gas production, laying the groundwork for a sustainable energy future. This review transcends the ordinary, unlocking the secrets that propel us toward a cleaner, brighter tomorrow.

Helloooo, chatbot. The whole damn thing is written like this, and the adjective-laden prose really starts to grate in the context of a supposed scientific article. But who am I kidding? This crap would grate in the context of an ad for a used-car lot. Everything is novel and exciting and unique and transformative and unusual and important, and the preferred chatbot verbs (like "delve") get a real workout along the way, too. The whole thing ends up sounding like the grandiose fantasies of someone who has either taken a not-very-entertaining recreational drug or has had a (hopefully temporary) injury to their centers of speech. Maybe both. Some sections flutter back down into reality, but then you get things like this:

In the captivating domain of electrochemical exploration, the platinum electrode assumes the spotlight. A meticulous cyclic voltammetry analysis at 550 °C, immersed in molten NaOH, unveils the nuanced interplay of redox peaks, symbolic of the reduction of a delicate oxide film enveloping the platinum wire's surface.¹³⁵Fig. 3(D) presents the cyclic voltammograms from Ge et al.'s study¹³⁵ employing platinum as the working electrode. Each peak narrates a unique story: the cathodic current peak C₁ signifies the poetic reduction of the oxide film; the captivating surge in cathodic current at C₂ (−0.4 V) unfolds a ballet of hydrogen gas evolution; the anodic current peak O₁ depicts the stoic oxidation of the oxide film, and the enchanting O₂ serves as a crescendo harmonizing with the birth of oxygen gas. The saga continues beyond platinum, venturing into the realm of noble nickel. Its cyclic voltammetry narrative in molten NaOH reveals a tapestry of redox peaks akin to its platinum counterpart. The cathodic sonnet at C₃ serenades the reduction of a wispy oxide film caressing the nickel surface. 

The authors, if that's the word we're looking for, are from eight different locations ranging from Penn State through Nottingham, Morocco, Moscow, Sarajevo, Islamabad and more. But there is nowhere on earth where people talk (or write) like this, or at least there shouldn't be. The authors never should have let this manuscript go out in this form, and needless to say, neither should the editors. If that's the word we're looking for. Come on, people: if you're going to use the automatic word-rearrangers, at least try to cover your tracks a tiny bit.

This is what we have to look forward to? Journals filling up with this bilge, this useless wordy debris? Gosh, that's going to work out great with all those machine-learning algorithms for collating human knowledge - just wait until we pour these buckets of sludge into them. That'll produce all kinds of captivating insights for us to delve into. Oh, God.

Louie was in a shelter near me.   Could we help him?  We could.  Look at that sweet face. He went to the vet to get his first rescue checkup.    I think he had something to say.   The vet groomer fit him in Monday morning to be groomed.  He's all cleaned up and ready to go!
He did not want to get bloodwork done though.  He went to my friend who took care of him over the weekend.  He wanted her to help. 

Louie will be neutered on Wednesday, and then he will see the ophthalmologist next week.  He has two cherry eyes and they will need to be repaired.  A new life just began for this boy.  💙  WELCOME TO PVPC LOUIE!

I haven’t blogged on the microplastics-in-human-tissue reports, but they have certainly been disturbing. Over the last few years, there have been studies suggesting that such species have been accumulating in human brain tissue, the cardiovascular system, testicular tissue and more. There are obviously a lot of microplastic particles out there, considering the environmental wear on so many years of plastic packinging, etc., and it seems unlikely that they’re improving anything. But I will admit to being surprised at the idea of them accumulating in human tissues to this extent.

Well, it looks like these results are becoming the site of an analytical-techniques dispute, at least according to the Guardian. Here, for example, is a “Matters Arising” communication about the brain microplastics paper, and its authors say that the original paper does not have enough controls for its methods (pyrolysis GC/MS). They note that the sample preparation techniques used are especially tricky for brain tissue, with its very high lipid content, and that long-chain fatty acids (found naturally in such tissue) can produce polyethylene-like fragments in the GC/MS analysis. They refer to “broader, ongoing gaps in analytical rigor” in this area, and call for researchers to use standardized methods with plenty of internal controls, blank experiments, background corrections, and so on.

Similarly, the cardiovascular microplastics paper has come under similar criticism. Those authors point out that the risk of contamination of surgical tissue samples with microplastics during their collection is high, and the paper makes no mention of safeguards to deal with that problem. There were also no blank samples tested, as far as can be seen. Furthermore, the size of the particles noted was much smaller than those seen in other literature reports, with no explanation of how these differences might have come about, and the authors believe that these and other factors could make the paper’s data and conclusions unreliable. Other such criticisms accompany other prominent papers in the field.

There seems to be a general problem of groups publishing in this area who have not been sufficiently aware of all the ways that such analyses (which are getting close to the limits of detection) might go wrong. Or perhaps they haven’t been burned enough in the past! This is a tricky area, because you don’t want to see legitimate scientific criticisms used by various yahoos to proclaim that the whole idea of microplastic contamination is bogus. But if we’re going to get a handle on how much of a problem it is in biological systems -  and we certainly should - we need numbers that we can trust. 

Discussing analytical techniques and standards - disagreeing about them very much included - is an essential part of doing good analytical chemistry. That’s how science is supposed to work. Your methods, results, and ideas need to be strong enough to stand up under informed criticism, and if they aren’t, you go back and fix them or you withdraw your claims. Let’s see how this one shakes out!

 Do you have Velcro dogs?  Do they velcro to you or to another dog?  Mine do both.

Mine usually have another dog touching them.  And they’re often like this. (No climbing for Divkens for awhile as his back heals.)
Granger and Tuk Tuk love to be together especially if there is a box involved.  Ludo and Toby have to be touching. They’re from the Christmas rescue so they would pile up together. They take comfort in that. 

Patty came to rescue in September of 2023.  She came in with ChuChu, Toasty, Leia and Rey.  Patty was Padme and her foster parents decided to adopt her.   She is a great snugger and loves to play with her toys.  She was in a shelter in Maryland, and we were asked to take the 5.  
Patty-- or Patricia is she's being naughty LOL-- has a brother named Bing who is another Albino.  

Rocky belongs to one of our club friends.  Margie and Rocky live in Florida.  Margie is friends w many of us. 
Rocky sent Happy New Year wishes to all of us. I love his pose here.  He’s very flexible.  
He smiles a lot!  He’s so happy. 
Are you showing off your toy?   Was it a Christmas present?He’s ready for a nice winter afternoon nap.  Winter is a good time to slow down especially for us in colder weather. 🥶 Melinda in Australia might not know about cold right now. It’s 72 in Australia!  🌞🌞