Ed Russo

@whitfieldlewis6 This is an excellent synopsis.

I am currently doing a ~40-hour fast. Interestingly, data show that fasting in healthy, nonobese humans increases total cholesterol, LDL-C, and ApoB. So why fast? Should I discourage others from fasting because of a potential bump in LDL-C? Of course not. LDL-C is not synonymous with cardiovascular disease. We have decades of data helping us contextualize LDL-C within the broader metabolic environment. Fasting triggers major metabolic changes that are generally associated with improved cardiometabolic health: insulin levels fall (improving insulin sensitivity), fat burning increases (greater metabolic flexibility), ketone production rises, triglycerides often decrease, blood pressure may improve, and the body becomes less dependent on constant glucose intake. In other words, you are shifting back toward using your own stored body fat and endogenous glucose more efficiently instead of remaining heavily dependent on continuous dietary glucose intake to maintain energy homeostasis and glucose homeostasis. Importantly, cardiovascular risk is not determined by LDL-C alone. The metabolic environment matters. High triglycerides, low HDL, insulin resistance, hypertension, visceral obesity, and chronic hyperglycemia are all strongly linked to cardiovascular disease. In many studies, triglycerides and HDL are often stronger predictors of future cardiometabolic risk because they better capture this broader metabolic context. Even LDL particles are not all identical. Small dense LDL particles are more strongly associated with insulin resistance, metabolic dysfunction, and cardiovascular disease risk, whereas larger, more buoyant LDL particles are more commonly seen in metabolically healthier states characterized by lower triglycerides and higher HDL. Some studies suggest these larger LDL particles may carry a substantially lower risk (or even neutral risk) when controlled for levels of small dense LDL particles. PMCID: PMC3999643 Thus, a rise in LDL-C during fasting occurs within a much larger physiologic context — one that often includes improvements in many of the factors most consistently associated with future cardiovascular risk and events, including triglycerides, HDL, insulin sensitivity, visceral adiposity, blood pressure, inflammatory burden, and markers of metabolic dysfunction. Context matters in human metabolism. Reference: Sävendahl & Underwood. Fasting Increases Serum Total Cholesterol, LDL Cholesterol and Apolipoprotein B in Healthy, Nonobese Humans. Journal of Nutrition. 1999;129(11):2005–2008. DOI: 10.1093/jn/129.11.2005

That radar hole in SE Missouri is brutal tonight. It sits between radars, so we’re basically blind to low-level rotation… tornado signatures could be there, but harder to see.

@WXmarcus This is outcome bias. The National Weather Service communicated the threat, issued watches and warnings, and protected lives. Judging it a “failure” because storms didn’t max out their ceiling misses the point.

I think it’s important to acknowledge the failure by the NWS today. Two violent tornadoes in only a cig 1 in an environment that could’ve easily supported the cig 2+ is ridiculous.

The “solo FPV drone pilot” thing in ads? Goggles = no VLOS. No VLOS = not compliant with FAA rules. Funny how they never show the visual observer.

@bobagreenwood @JohnCas48762330 @ChrisMartzWX John, that’s an impressive level of confidence for someone who has zero understanding. Those equations describe the physics of the atmosphere... fluid dynamics, thermodynamics, & vorticity. Calling it an ‘easy A’ just says you never got far enough to know what it actually is.

As a meteorologist, I can confidently tell you that you failed thermodynamics and high school physics. “Chemtrails” are not real. If you’re an engineer, I wouldn’t trust you to build a Lego set.

@joeroganhq Confident language doesn't ensure objectivity in science... in fact it shows the opposite! We deal in probabilities... not absolutes like ‘virtually impossible.’ You can’t call something ‘virtually impossible’ in a system as complex as Earth’s climate!

"Climate scientists have said that this heat wave that they're experiencing at the minute in the United States would have been virtually impossible without human-induced climate change."

@kapboy59 @ChrisMartzWX Is this supposed to be a rebuttal to @ChrisMartzWX’s tweet? Thanks for showing your very deep knowledge on the subject of climate science. I’m tempted to bookmark this.

@ChrisMartzWX Because nobody gives a shit about how cold it is in Vostok, Antarctica - population 15 scientists.

Vostok, Antarctica bottomed out at −76.4°C (−105.5°F) sometime between 12:00 UTC yesterday and 00:00 this morning. 🇦🇶 If confirmed, this sets a new continental and worldwide record low temperature for March. 🌡️🏆 But you won't hear a peep about it in the press.

What a morning! 🏄‍♂️

Caught some super fun northeast Florida sliders this morning.

@ABC You know what the real problem is? Reducing complex, multi-variable human behavior into a clean, deterministic headline. Reality is far more nuanced. This is just more hyped-up doom and gloom.

As global temperatures rise, people are becoming less physically active, and this shift could lead to hundreds of thousands of additional premature deaths worldwide in the coming decades, a new study finds. abcnews.link/CEGdAW9

@TinyTigerXO @SNHWx UNBELIEVABLE! This is exactly the problem. Not just what’s said… but how they say it! Absolute statements, talking down to people, and no room for accountability. This builds ZERO trust.

@SNHWx @EdRussoWX Oh they kept going in the comments. 😅

A popular weather page posted this ahead of yesterday’s severe threat. Completely reckless and irresponsible. This creates unnecessary fear, not preparedness. We as meteorologists / science-communicators are losing the battle to these toxic pages.

@DavidCorrentect Of course they did. But they continue to gaslight people who were criticizing the original post. There is ZERO accountability with these pages.

@EdRussoWX It's now deleted

@P_SimmsWX Easy as 1+1=2

@EdRussoWX I didn't have to think much to know what page posted this.

@SNHWx Of course they did. They contradict themselves all the time because they don’t understand the gravity of what they’re saying.

@EdRussoWX And then later made a post telling people not to panic 🙃

In most situations, it should take no longer than 20 seconds to reach your shelter when a warning is issued. Have a plan for those w/ limited mobility, & crate pets in your shelter BEFORE a warning is issued. These two situations are often overlooked... can't stress that enough.

Some messy/disorganized clusters already across VA could reduce degree of instability for the afternoon round which is good. Latest trends are certainly moving in the right direction of a potentially more limited severe threat. Still need to remain weather aware today.

Tomorrow’s setup for central PA doesn’t need tons of sun. Strong dynamics and shear mean storms can rapidly destabilize even with limited heating. Tornadoes are possible. The main question is storm mode… if storms are messy/disorganized early, that could temper overall threat.

A 45% severe wind probability area in Central PA, especially at Day 2, is very rare. This speaks to the level of confidence in widespread damaging wind gusts in tomorrow’s severe thunderstorm setup. 60% probabilities extend just to our south into central MD.

Approach into Dulles Airport. The burbs of DC definitely got a solid accumulation of anafrontal snow. RARE. #vawx #mdwx