Researchers of this study have discovered the oldest blood known to modern science. They have used a mummy, they named Ötzi , whose body was frozen in a glacier for over 5,000 years. Blood was extracted from the wound that was presumed to cause his death. Using both an atomic force microscope and a raman spectroscopy method, red blood cells were positively identified. This in itself was a break through because scientists could not begin to imagine how long blood could survive, let alone what these cells looked like in the Chalcolithic period. According to their results using nanotechnology, they not only identified the blood from the wound, but also characterized it to look like the modern "doughnut shape" we know today. Using Ötzi's blood, scientists hope to estimate how long a trace of blood has been present at a crime scene.
Cool, huh?! What do y'all think about the break through?!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120502141132.htm
Wednesday, December 4, 2013
Blog 13b: Tall DNA
In this article, 180 DNA variants that were implicated in normal height variation was tested with extremely tall subjects and normal height control subjects. When doing so, it was found that 90% of the variants had some effect on height in tall people and of this percentage, 40 % was significant. Long story short, they are using this DNA-based prediction technique in forensic molecular biology to estimate the height of a person based on these variants. If they are successful, they hope to apply this testing to possibly find perpetrators who do not have DNA profiles in authoritative systems.
What do y'all think about this? Will it work?!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/131120103613.htm
What do y'all think about this? Will it work?!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/131120103613.htm
Blog 13a: Spit and Aggression
Scientists of this study have recognized that aggression in young boys, ages 7 to 9, can be related to three types of hormones: testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) and cortisol. Using saliva samples from this range of boys, they are able to detect or predict violent behavior. According to their results of all 17 boys, the levels in these hormones correlated to the severity and frequency of aggression. The researchers hope to one day use this type of testing to improve safety in schools by identifying boys that have the potential to be dangerous to peers and seeking the proper help for them.
My questions for this article is why did they only focus on males? What are the hormones that would signify aggression in young females?
What are your thoughts on this study and possible questions you all have?!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130326162157.htm
My questions for this article is why did they only focus on males? What are the hormones that would signify aggression in young females?
What are your thoughts on this study and possible questions you all have?!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130326162157.htm
Friday, November 15, 2013
Blog 12b: Heroin...enough said
So! The study presented by Jorg Morland from Norway discusses how heroin works (mechanisms and pathways to the brain) and how addiction can be treated.
Morland and his group of researchers theorizes that heroin is not introduced to the brain as such, yet morphine. According to them, heroin goes through a series of transformations before reaching the brain, one being 6-MAM, a metabolite. This metabolite induces the signaling of dopamine, a crucial molecule in the reward circuit for pleasure. The 6-MAM then converts to morphine about an hour of heroin injection to the body, and then dominates for the proceeding hours. Six to twelve hours after injection, morphine produces a metabolite called morphin-6-glucuronide that is responsible for the heroin effects one may observe.
Treatment that Morland's group are looking into, deals with blocking these substances from entering the brain with the 6-MAM antibody. When the antibody binds to 6-MAM, it will be too large to enter the brain, thus causing a stop to the effects of heroin.
Pretty dang on awesome!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130926102626.htm
Morland and his group of researchers theorizes that heroin is not introduced to the brain as such, yet morphine. According to them, heroin goes through a series of transformations before reaching the brain, one being 6-MAM, a metabolite. This metabolite induces the signaling of dopamine, a crucial molecule in the reward circuit for pleasure. The 6-MAM then converts to morphine about an hour of heroin injection to the body, and then dominates for the proceeding hours. Six to twelve hours after injection, morphine produces a metabolite called morphin-6-glucuronide that is responsible for the heroin effects one may observe.
Treatment that Morland's group are looking into, deals with blocking these substances from entering the brain with the 6-MAM antibody. When the antibody binds to 6-MAM, it will be too large to enter the brain, thus causing a stop to the effects of heroin.
Pretty dang on awesome!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130926102626.htm
Blog 12a: Workout with Methamphetamine
Remember when Coca-Cola had cocaine in it? I've always believed it was to keep consumers addicted to the product, whether it is true or not is up to you. Well, the idea is far from gone. The company Drive Sports produced a "performance fuel" supplement called CRAZE, that one would take before a workout to help enhance their performance without the crash feeling of energy drinks or such. After many athletes failed their athletic drug tests, further research went into this product for answers; "the results revealed the presence of methamphetamine analog N,alpha-DEPEA", a drug with addictive qualities.
Three samples of this product were tested from different locations: US retail stores, and online stores in US and Holland. Using high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), the scientists were able to correctly identify the methamphetamine analog, a dangerous designer drug. The company stands behind their statement that the compound that is in their product (N,N-diethyl-phenylethylamine or N,N-DEPEA) is what they use instead of the N,alpha-DEPEA and it is derived from endangered dendrobium orchids. Scientists have no proof if the compound Driven Sports claim actually comes from orchids, but nonetheless, after analysis of their samples, the analog has been identified.
As of now the product has been banned. If the facts are true regarding where the compound (N,N-DEPEA) is derived, the only thing the FDA can do is "warn consumers and remove supplements containing N,alpha-DEPEA from sale.
Mind blowing if you ask me!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131014094107.htm
Three samples of this product were tested from different locations: US retail stores, and online stores in US and Holland. Using high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), the scientists were able to correctly identify the methamphetamine analog, a dangerous designer drug. The company stands behind their statement that the compound that is in their product (N,N-diethyl-phenylethylamine or N,N-DEPEA) is what they use instead of the N,alpha-DEPEA and it is derived from endangered dendrobium orchids. Scientists have no proof if the compound Driven Sports claim actually comes from orchids, but nonetheless, after analysis of their samples, the analog has been identified.
As of now the product has been banned. If the facts are true regarding where the compound (N,N-DEPEA) is derived, the only thing the FDA can do is "warn consumers and remove supplements containing N,alpha-DEPEA from sale.
Mind blowing if you ask me!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131014094107.htm
Sunday, November 10, 2013
Blog 11b: The microbial clock and time of death
So! I'm reading the article and before I finish the first sentence, I see it deals with our lovely University!
In September, Science Daily reports how the microbial clock can help determine the time of death of an individual. A research group is working closely with Dr. Sibyl Bucheli and Aaron Lynne (spelled Linne according to them) to discover how this is so. The scientists are testing the microbes on a body as one decomposes as a function of external factors such as "weather, seasons, animal scavenging and insect infestations". The study is still pretty new, so there isn't anything conclusive, but it is still interesting!
I thought the article was pretty cool because it dealt with good ol' SHSU. Is it just me or did you slightly get excited as well?!
Find the link below:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130924153953.htm
In September, Science Daily reports how the microbial clock can help determine the time of death of an individual. A research group is working closely with Dr. Sibyl Bucheli and Aaron Lynne (spelled Linne according to them) to discover how this is so. The scientists are testing the microbes on a body as one decomposes as a function of external factors such as "weather, seasons, animal scavenging and insect infestations". The study is still pretty new, so there isn't anything conclusive, but it is still interesting!
I thought the article was pretty cool because it dealt with good ol' SHSU. Is it just me or did you slightly get excited as well?!
Find the link below:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130924153953.htm
Blog 11a: Lollipops that attack?!
Well, not literally (lollipops do not attack). The bacterium Yersinia enterocolitica, is one that causes fever and diarrhea upon infection. It uses extensions from its body called adhensins that are sticky, thus allowing for adhesion to the host cell for attack. The scientists of this study are hoping to discover the exact transportation of extracellular domains; in doing so, they have identified important components of Y. enterocolitica's gram negative membrane. Having insight to the membrane and how the bacteria moves about, will aid in the development of antibiotics to fight against the infection.
My question: would you go for the transportation mechanism or find a way to stop the bacteria by the way it attaches to a host cell? Which do you think would be a better method?
Find the article below:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121112090513.htm
My question: would you go for the transportation mechanism or find a way to stop the bacteria by the way it attaches to a host cell? Which do you think would be a better method?
Find the article below:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121112090513.htm
Monday, November 4, 2013
Blog 10b: Who Said Suicide Was Always Bad?!
Excerpt from article:
"Centrioles are tiny structures in the cell that play an important role in cell division and in the assembly of cilia and flagella. Changes in the number of centrioles are involved in diseases, such as cancer or infertility."
Centrioles are formed with the use of a protein regulator named Polo-like kinase 4 (PLK4), when it is absent or in excess, the centrioles may never form or form too many, therefore some form of regulation must occur. PLK4 regulates itself by what the scientists consider, suicide. PLK4 self-destructs in a controlled and timely manner; it does so by adding a phosphate group on to different sites of PLK4 in a specific order to act as destruction signals.
Using the model organism known as the fruit fly, scientists were able to observe the effect of an abolished destruction mechanism on its fertility in both male and females; both showed to have been impacted by the change.
I thought this was interesting because the whole time I was reading the article I kept thinking of the movie The Core. In the movie, they had to set a bomb off at a precise time and at a precise distance around the core to ensure that the core will being to rotate again (for those who have not seen the movie, the world was coming to an end because the core of the Earth was no longer rotating). Well, for the PLK4 protein, it had to self-destruct by a series of events to at a precise time to provide PLK4 "with enough time for centriole number control before it is degraded". Number control helped with making sure it did not kill all PLK4 proteins present and that enough is actually killed.
What do you all think about this mechanism of self-destructing?
Article:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131031124815.htm
"Centrioles are tiny structures in the cell that play an important role in cell division and in the assembly of cilia and flagella. Changes in the number of centrioles are involved in diseases, such as cancer or infertility."
Centrioles are formed with the use of a protein regulator named Polo-like kinase 4 (PLK4), when it is absent or in excess, the centrioles may never form or form too many, therefore some form of regulation must occur. PLK4 regulates itself by what the scientists consider, suicide. PLK4 self-destructs in a controlled and timely manner; it does so by adding a phosphate group on to different sites of PLK4 in a specific order to act as destruction signals.
Using the model organism known as the fruit fly, scientists were able to observe the effect of an abolished destruction mechanism on its fertility in both male and females; both showed to have been impacted by the change.
I thought this was interesting because the whole time I was reading the article I kept thinking of the movie The Core. In the movie, they had to set a bomb off at a precise time and at a precise distance around the core to ensure that the core will being to rotate again (for those who have not seen the movie, the world was coming to an end because the core of the Earth was no longer rotating). Well, for the PLK4 protein, it had to self-destruct by a series of events to at a precise time to provide PLK4 "with enough time for centriole number control before it is degraded". Number control helped with making sure it did not kill all PLK4 proteins present and that enough is actually killed.
What do you all think about this mechanism of self-destructing?
Article:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131031124815.htm
Blog 10a: Why Do Babies Get Sick?!
Automatically we assume newborns are prone to sickness due to their weak immunity system, which is true. This article approaches this idea with new evidence that supports this idea with a protein names toll-like receptor or TLR3 for short.
When comparing blood cell samples from newborns with those of the same blood type of adults, the TLR3 protein was missing from the newborns that was present in adults. The TLR3 protein is responsible for getting rid of viral-infected cells introduced by a virus of sorts such as the herpes simplex virus (HSV). A discovery made was that the adult immune system responded by ways of killing the virus, while the newborns immune systems were either impaired of functioning in this same response or could not do so at all.
With this new information, the scientist plan to use this knowledge to develop novel therapies to fight against newborn illnesses.
Article:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131031125203.htm
When comparing blood cell samples from newborns with those of the same blood type of adults, the TLR3 protein was missing from the newborns that was present in adults. The TLR3 protein is responsible for getting rid of viral-infected cells introduced by a virus of sorts such as the herpes simplex virus (HSV). A discovery made was that the adult immune system responded by ways of killing the virus, while the newborns immune systems were either impaired of functioning in this same response or could not do so at all.
With this new information, the scientist plan to use this knowledge to develop novel therapies to fight against newborn illnesses.
Article:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131031125203.htm
Sunday, October 27, 2013
Lithium in the brain...enough said.
I decided to write about this article because it closely relates to what I completed my research paper on.
In the article, it explains the use of lithium to treat many psychological diseases by reducing aggression potential and lightening patient's moods. Some of these psychological diseases include "depression, manias and bipolar disorder".
With their research, they realized that lithium "does not work in the space between nerve cells like other psychotropic drugs, [instead it works] within the nerve tracts themselves.
The ultimate goal is to create a map of sorts that will show lithium accumulation in the brain; this would allow for future use in terms of using lithium as a prescription drug to treat psychological disorders with precision.
Now, to what I was really trying to get to...they say lithium is responsible for lightening peoples moods right? Well, after watching a few documentaries as to how methamphetamine is made, I found that the "one pot" method uses the lithium in the battery to get the reactions going since it is highly reactive. Other than the dopamine transmission in the brain, I wonder if this is what causes the pleasure feeling METH users feel.
What do you all think? Not so much about battery usage in methamphetamine making, but lithium as a prescription drug? What could the downfalls in this be?!
Link below:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130926103031.htm
In the article, it explains the use of lithium to treat many psychological diseases by reducing aggression potential and lightening patient's moods. Some of these psychological diseases include "depression, manias and bipolar disorder".
With their research, they realized that lithium "does not work in the space between nerve cells like other psychotropic drugs, [instead it works] within the nerve tracts themselves.
The ultimate goal is to create a map of sorts that will show lithium accumulation in the brain; this would allow for future use in terms of using lithium as a prescription drug to treat psychological disorders with precision.
Now, to what I was really trying to get to...they say lithium is responsible for lightening peoples moods right? Well, after watching a few documentaries as to how methamphetamine is made, I found that the "one pot" method uses the lithium in the battery to get the reactions going since it is highly reactive. Other than the dopamine transmission in the brain, I wonder if this is what causes the pleasure feeling METH users feel.
What do you all think? Not so much about battery usage in methamphetamine making, but lithium as a prescription drug? What could the downfalls in this be?!
Link below:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130926103031.htm
Thursday, October 24, 2013
Blog 8b: Crustaceans that can drink their prey!
A NEW DISCOVERY! Thanks to Björn von Reumont and Ronald Jenner, two biologist has discovered the First Venomous Crustacean. Crustaceans are a "subgroup of arthropods that includes shrimp and crabs", yet none have been known be be venomous. Specifically speaking, Spelenectes tulumensis is the crustacean that belongs to the remipedes group that has been discovered.
It is believed that they posses a two step process that aid in the killing of their prey. The first step is a toxin that is considered to be identical to the neurotoxin found in spiders that paralyzes the prey. The second and last step for the remipede is the venom itself, but the venom used is unique. The venom is primarily composed of peptidases, an enzyme that helps in digestion; a venom similar to this would be found in rattlesnake venom. BUT WAIT, there's more! To my understanding, the enzyme is not like amylase--the breaking down of starch in our saliva. NO! This enzyme is responsible for digestion of the prey itself, YES, making the prey into what the article refers to as a milkshake! Much easier than chewing I would say.
Where are places we as humans use peptidase other than in the stomach? I am interested to see the responses you all come up with.
The link to the article is is within the second sentence of the blog post.
It is believed that they posses a two step process that aid in the killing of their prey. The first step is a toxin that is considered to be identical to the neurotoxin found in spiders that paralyzes the prey. The second and last step for the remipede is the venom itself, but the venom used is unique. The venom is primarily composed of peptidases, an enzyme that helps in digestion; a venom similar to this would be found in rattlesnake venom. BUT WAIT, there's more! To my understanding, the enzyme is not like amylase--the breaking down of starch in our saliva. NO! This enzyme is responsible for digestion of the prey itself, YES, making the prey into what the article refers to as a milkshake! Much easier than chewing I would say.
Where are places we as humans use peptidase other than in the stomach? I am interested to see the responses you all come up with.
The link to the article is is within the second sentence of the blog post.
Blog 8a: Obese? No problem...they have a pill for you!
According to Science Daily, today, there was an post regarding those who are obese and a linkage to a mutation in the K2R2 gene. The K2R2 gene has been identified as the gene responsible for an increase in appetite and a slower metabolism than those with a normal copy of the gene. Researchers would believe that this is the cause for the increasing number of children battling obesity.
Here, they conclude that knowing this is the gene responsible for the characteristics listed above, they can synthesize a drug that can work as treatment for those with the mutation. The idea is based off of metformin, a drug for diabetes that has effectively reduced levels of fatty acid oxidation (see article for more detail).
Questions to ponder, would you consider this a new diet pill?! Could there be any disadvantages to taking the pill, and if so, what are the crazy things you can think of?!
Here, they conclude that knowing this is the gene responsible for the characteristics listed above, they can synthesize a drug that can work as treatment for those with the mutation. The idea is based off of metformin, a drug for diabetes that has effectively reduced levels of fatty acid oxidation (see article for more detail).
Questions to ponder, would you consider this a new diet pill?! Could there be any disadvantages to taking the pill, and if so, what are the crazy things you can think of?!
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
Blog 7b: Bingeing on Halloween Candy is Not the Same
As a child during Halloween, candy could be indulged in great amounts and our digestive system did not even hesitate to metabolize it. When age becomes a factor, it has been said that the gene called Foxo is to blame for the agony of candy or junk food bingeing.
Identifying the gene responsible for regulation of metabolism helps researches develop means of intervening with this process. Intervention will help in the [preservation of a] well-functioning metabolism" even as one ages.
My question to you all is, what are the down sides if any to this intervention of the metabolic pathway?
Click on article below to read more about the topic:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131014221500.htm
Identifying the gene responsible for regulation of metabolism helps researches develop means of intervening with this process. Intervention will help in the [preservation of a] well-functioning metabolism" even as one ages.
My question to you all is, what are the down sides if any to this intervention of the metabolic pathway?
Click on article below to read more about the topic:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131014221500.htm
Blog 7a: Light that can KILL
I just like making my post titles really outrageous!
According to Science Daily, light can actually trigger cancer cells to die, known as a death switch. This switch is turned on by exposing a peptide the researches created to "external light pulses [that will] convert it into a cell death signal".
From what I took out of the article, it seems as if they will be able to alter the interactions in B-cell lymphoma cancer cells thus controlling rapid division and slowing the growth process down if not totally stopping the spread.
They propose the idea that through this method of transient photoactivation, they will be able to identify the cells that are "normally resistant to chemotherapy", thus aid in the development of treatments for cancer patients that will be more effective.
My question to you all is, how does this differ from radiation? Isn't radiation killing cancer cells by light in the form of lasers?
The link to the article is below:
Light Triggers Death Switch in Cancer Cells
According to Science Daily, light can actually trigger cancer cells to die, known as a death switch. This switch is turned on by exposing a peptide the researches created to "external light pulses [that will] convert it into a cell death signal".
From what I took out of the article, it seems as if they will be able to alter the interactions in B-cell lymphoma cancer cells thus controlling rapid division and slowing the growth process down if not totally stopping the spread.
They propose the idea that through this method of transient photoactivation, they will be able to identify the cells that are "normally resistant to chemotherapy", thus aid in the development of treatments for cancer patients that will be more effective.
My question to you all is, how does this differ from radiation? Isn't radiation killing cancer cells by light in the form of lasers?
The link to the article is below:
Light Triggers Death Switch in Cancer Cells
Tuesday, October 8, 2013
Blog 6b: Feces in a Pill...Yummy!
SO! For this blog I found an article that talks about having feces in a pill! Isn't that just appealing?!
Well for those who suffer from Clostridum difficile, " a bacterial infection that causes diarrhea and fever" and responsible for 14,000 US citizen deaths, would much rather take a pill filled with feces rather than the current techniques in killing the bacteria.
As of now, the bacteria is killed with fecal transplants of donor feces by "enemas, colonoscopies, or nasal tubes that run directly to the gut" (OUCH!). The donor feces have healthy microbes that gets rid of C. difficile and promotes growth of good bacteria.
So, TECHNICALLY these patients are not literally digesting a pill with feces, but the microbes extracting for a feces donor are put into the pill. The next step is to stop asking healthy individuals for fecal samples (LOL). Therefore, the idea of make a pill that uses bacteria grown in a laboratory is not far fetched; only issue is how much it would cost to get a laboratory up and running with all the work that goes behind this research.
"As Tom Moore, a physician and infectious-disease specialist in Wichita, Kansas, puts it: 'It'll be difficult to compete with the ready availability and very cheap costs of human poop.' "
What do you all think about this method of delivering healthy microbes to the human gut? Would it just be better to stick with what we have been doing?
Click the link to read more about it
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=feces-filled-pill-stops-gut-infection
Well for those who suffer from Clostridum difficile, " a bacterial infection that causes diarrhea and fever" and responsible for 14,000 US citizen deaths, would much rather take a pill filled with feces rather than the current techniques in killing the bacteria.
As of now, the bacteria is killed with fecal transplants of donor feces by "enemas, colonoscopies, or nasal tubes that run directly to the gut" (OUCH!). The donor feces have healthy microbes that gets rid of C. difficile and promotes growth of good bacteria.
So, TECHNICALLY these patients are not literally digesting a pill with feces, but the microbes extracting for a feces donor are put into the pill. The next step is to stop asking healthy individuals for fecal samples (LOL). Therefore, the idea of make a pill that uses bacteria grown in a laboratory is not far fetched; only issue is how much it would cost to get a laboratory up and running with all the work that goes behind this research.
"As Tom Moore, a physician and infectious-disease specialist in Wichita, Kansas, puts it: 'It'll be difficult to compete with the ready availability and very cheap costs of human poop.' "
What do you all think about this method of delivering healthy microbes to the human gut? Would it just be better to stick with what we have been doing?
Click the link to read more about it
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=feces-filled-pill-stops-gut-infection
Blog 6a: Smoking Pregnant Mothers and their Allergenic Children
Smoking while pregnant has always been a strong factor in the way newborn children develop abnormally, but the exact reason or processes behind developmental issues were never clear. This research article attempts to show a connection between microRNA and the child's probability to develop allergies at a young age.
The group of scientist focus on microRNA-223, microRNA-155 and regulatory T cells, because to their best knowledge, these microRNAs are responsible for immune response and the T cells aid in preventing overactive immune systems. If there is damage to the T cells that interrupts its function, this will cause "the self-regulatory function of the immune system [to] be reduced, [thus], possibly resulting in allergies".
Collected blood samples from pregnant women and the birth cord of those children who were just born, were analyzed to estimate concentrations of microRNAs and number of regulatory T cells. When specifically examining microRNA-233, it was said that a high concentration for this microRNA and high value of T cells would prove that children exposed to tobacco smoke are most likely to develop allergies before the age of three. This assumption was made by connecting high values of microRNA-233 to low regulatory T-cell numbers, thus the immune system is not as strong as a healthy child's would be. Also, it was stated that the chance of developing eczema are higher when the child has high microRNA-223 concentrations.
I thought the theory behind this article was very interesting. My only question is, how does having allergies actually explain the reason for developmental issues such as "respiratory diseases, diabetes type II, or asthma"? These were all examples given in the article as things a child are prone to developing because of having a mother who smoke during pregnancy. Maybe I am just missing something, but that link is a little confusing.
What do y'all think?!
Here is the link so you can read it for yourself
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131007094324.htm
The group of scientist focus on microRNA-223, microRNA-155 and regulatory T cells, because to their best knowledge, these microRNAs are responsible for immune response and the T cells aid in preventing overactive immune systems. If there is damage to the T cells that interrupts its function, this will cause "the self-regulatory function of the immune system [to] be reduced, [thus], possibly resulting in allergies".
Collected blood samples from pregnant women and the birth cord of those children who were just born, were analyzed to estimate concentrations of microRNAs and number of regulatory T cells. When specifically examining microRNA-233, it was said that a high concentration for this microRNA and high value of T cells would prove that children exposed to tobacco smoke are most likely to develop allergies before the age of three. This assumption was made by connecting high values of microRNA-233 to low regulatory T-cell numbers, thus the immune system is not as strong as a healthy child's would be. Also, it was stated that the chance of developing eczema are higher when the child has high microRNA-223 concentrations.
I thought the theory behind this article was very interesting. My only question is, how does having allergies actually explain the reason for developmental issues such as "respiratory diseases, diabetes type II, or asthma"? These were all examples given in the article as things a child are prone to developing because of having a mother who smoke during pregnancy. Maybe I am just missing something, but that link is a little confusing.
What do y'all think?!
Here is the link so you can read it for yourself
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131007094324.htm
Sunday, September 29, 2013
Depression = Diabetes?
In a recent article, it has been stated that those who take anti-depressant pills usually also have type 2 diabetes. According to the article a link between the two seems to be there, but there is not strong proof the actually show that one causes the other.
The authors did raise the issue that it may be, those who take these pills naturally put on weight, thus increasing their changes of diabetes. In addition to this, they also mentioned the possibility that the "drugs themselves could interfere with blood sugar control."
Either way, it is interesting to think that there may be a link between the two. I wonder if the same goes for birth control pills. I've been told many females gain weight when taking these pills. Interesting I'd say!
What do you all think about it? Is it possible that anti-depressants can cause type 2 diabetes?
Link to article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-24217982
The authors did raise the issue that it may be, those who take these pills naturally put on weight, thus increasing their changes of diabetes. In addition to this, they also mentioned the possibility that the "drugs themselves could interfere with blood sugar control."
Either way, it is interesting to think that there may be a link between the two. I wonder if the same goes for birth control pills. I've been told many females gain weight when taking these pills. Interesting I'd say!
What do you all think about it? Is it possible that anti-depressants can cause type 2 diabetes?
Link to article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-24217982
Friday, September 20, 2013
Stopping the Spread of a Tumor
In recent news, it has been published that there is a molecular pathway that aids in the "ability of malignant glimoa cells in a brain tumor to spread" and damage healthy brain tissues. The malignant gliomas cells are something hard to fight. This is due to their resistance to both chemotherapy and radiation therapy coupled with its' ability to invade surrounding areas of the brain, thus, ultimately leading to death.
One method that is currently in use to shrink tumors, is to cut off provided oxygen (from low-oxygen environments) via blood supply; this is done by taking anti-angiogenesis drugs. Angiogenesis is a process of forming new blood vessels. Stopping angeiogenesis will, in a sense, starve the tumor and not allow it to spread.
The researches at University of Alabama at Birmingham have identified two proteins that link the increased motility of these cells with areas of low-oxygen or hypoxia. One of these proteins are responsible for signaling when hypoxia is activated (Src). The other protein is regulated by Src, neural Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome, or N-WASP for short. When the researches used protein inhibitors to shut off Src and N-WASP, hypoxia "lost its ability to augment cell movement". This means, spreading came to a stop.
In the end, the idea of creating anti-motility drugs are in close reach.
I think the vary idea would be awesome! To be able to stop the spread of tumor, thus possibly saving ones' life if caught early. My only question is, with this research being specific to the malignant gliomas cells, how can this be applied to other tumorous cells?
Just tell me what do y'all think about it, I'm excited to hear y'alls feedback!
Link to article:
Proteins Identified That May Help Brain Tumors Spread
Link to article:
Proteins Identified That May Help Brain Tumors Spread
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
No Use in Dieting Anymore...
In a fairly recent article, it states that dieting may not help to keep the weight off. The reason why you ask? Well, apparently there are nerves in the stomach that tells us when we're full, and a hormone, leptin, to encourage one to stop food intake; when continuous high-fat food consumption takes place, these nerves and hormones are desensitized. This means, those who are considered obese, even after losing weight, are 95% likely that they will gain the weight back within two years. Since this article only discusses obese people, it leaves out people are simply overweight. What does this mean for those persons? Good question.
One question I have is what if it is not desensitized nerves and hormones making people gain their weight back? Yes, this aids in people not being able to tell if they are full or not, but what about the saying "my eyes were bigger than my stomach"? People, who are trying to diet, should not depend on their body to say "I'm full," but notice their proportions and come to the conclusion that, what they are eating is enough to satisfy their hunger, not aim to get full.
But maybe that's just me. What do you all think about it?
Link to Article:
Monday, September 9, 2013
Change Your Diet, Change Your Taste
In the article I found from Science Daily, "Diet Experience Can Alter Taste Preferences" they propose the idea that if fed a long-term diet of a certain food or substance, you'll eventually learn to like something you probably did not before (aversive). The authors of this article based this study on the phenomenon that happens with humans.
They used the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster as the animal model and focused on camphor, a safe food additive that is considered aversive. Over time the fruit fly showed signs of accepting foods containing camphor; this was identified by degradation of the Transient Receptor Potential-Like protein. Plus and minus some other signs, the authors then reversed the entire experiment by putting the flies on a camphor-free diet. The levels of TRPL still decreased, proving that even when provided with food that was once aversive, the flies continued to chose it as a preference.
In my opinion, forcing defenseless flies to eat something they wouldn't normally eat is a response to their survival mechanism. Wouldn't humans do the same?! If my sole food source was eating something I liked, topped with something I didn't, I too would find the good in it for the sake of survival.
I am not sure if the way the authors went about the method of proving how our diets can change our taste preference was truly accurate, but it is intriguing. What do you all think?
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130909093159.htm
They used the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster as the animal model and focused on camphor, a safe food additive that is considered aversive. Over time the fruit fly showed signs of accepting foods containing camphor; this was identified by degradation of the Transient Receptor Potential-Like protein. Plus and minus some other signs, the authors then reversed the entire experiment by putting the flies on a camphor-free diet. The levels of TRPL still decreased, proving that even when provided with food that was once aversive, the flies continued to chose it as a preference.
In my opinion, forcing defenseless flies to eat something they wouldn't normally eat is a response to their survival mechanism. Wouldn't humans do the same?! If my sole food source was eating something I liked, topped with something I didn't, I too would find the good in it for the sake of survival.
I am not sure if the way the authors went about the method of proving how our diets can change our taste preference was truly accurate, but it is intriguing. What do you all think?
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130909093159.htm
Friday, August 30, 2013
Milk Mutants
I ran across something interesting today on the Scientific
American webpage. I often wondered why I heard that technically everyone
is lactose intolerant, yet some have symptoms worse than others. For example,
my father MUST drink milk brands such as Soy, Silk, or Lactaid to prevent
whatsoever from happening upon consumption of regular processed milk. I on the
other hand do not.
According to the article, some time ago
during the last glacial period, it was only children who could drink milk due
to having the lactase enzyme that broke lactose down, "the main sugar in
milk". Adults who did not posses this critical enzyme could fall victim of
the toxin.
Thousands of years ago, a genetic mutation
took over Europe that essentially lead to a change that branched from children
to adults as well; this change resulted in the production of lactase. If this
is so, then technically everyone as a result of this genetic mutation should be
able to tolerate milk, more so lactose, right? If we as Americans were discovered
by Europeans, is it not a possible thought that this mutation was descended to
us now?
I believe, despite my father's need of
milk that helps those who are considered lactose intolerant, it may be a mind
over matter idea. Maybe, symptoms of what one might consider to be lactose
intolerant are exaggerated, and in all honesty no one suffers from it. Placebo
effect anyone?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)