17th August 2011 Overcoming a Problem by Making it a Game

Today I read about the actions of a father whose daughter was struggling to cope with the breathing exercises she had to do to clear her lungs because she has cystic fibrosis. Instead of just battling on with the problem and forcing her to go through the necessary steps every night he turned it into fun. He made use of his contacts to develop a game which is controlled by the puffs on the breathing machine.

What I like about this story is that someone looked beyond the problem and traditional way of doing things to find a new and innovative solution. It's a story of one person making a difference with an idea and then pushing it through to development.

If something as onerous and painful can be made fun by making it into a game, what other things can be made more fun in some way? We might not all be able to come up with something that will have an effect on many other people, but how can we use our own creativity to make life easier and more enjoyable for ourselves and those around us?

7th June 2011 End polio now!

I listened to a talk about polio today. There are, or rather were, three types of polio. Polio type 2 has been wiped out already but what about the other two? They have been strongly reduced but not eradicated - yet. The following video explains the current situation. I find it exciting that there wiping out this terrible disease is within our grasp.
With the complete eradication of small pox, and now the considerable reduction of polio, I don't understand how people can doubt the value and importance of vaccine. Are they so blissfully unaware of how horrible the diseases they are risking are? Do they really want their children to be struggling for breath from whooping cough, or risking death from measles?

28th May 2011 It's those fungi to the rescue again: MS drug

Today I read about how a fungus, Isaria sinclairii, (pictures) has given rise to a new oral drug, Fingolimod for multiple sclerosis.

Isaria sinclairii is an entomopathogenic fungus which means it is an insect parasite which kills the host insect. It lands on an insect, grows through its outer skin and then takes up residence inside where it continues to grow, completely destroying the insect. It then produces little stalks with a white mass, called conidia,  a type of spores, at the top. (Pictures of this and other entomopathogenic fungi including the insect corpses).

Fingolimod is an immunosuppressive drug approved, in 2010 and 2011, for use in USA, Russia, Europe, Australia and Canada. It can slow the progression of disability and reduce the frequency and severity of symptoms in MS. [3, 6] Details of trials, both completed and continuing, side effects and how the drug works can be found at Multiple Sclerosis Trust: Fingolimod.

1. Science Based Medicine: Fungus Yields New Prescription Drug for Multiple Sclerosis
2. Wikipedia: Fingolimod
3. FDA press release
4. Wikipedia: Entomopathogenic fungus
5. Wikipedia: Conidium
6. Multiple Sclerosis Trust: Fingolimod

17th May 2011 Sitting

I ran across this rather nice visual summary of the information I wrote about about a month ago. (Click image for larger version.)


Via: Medical Billing And Coding

27th April 2011 Checklist for Evaluating Scientific Papers

Useful list to help evaluate the validity of research especially in medicine:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2696241/table/T2/

21st April 2011 Chimeras

A chimera is an animal which has two distinct sets of genetically different cells arising from different fertilised eggs. If these different cells arise from one fertilised egg, it's called mosaicism.

A while back, in an episode of CSI, a man was found to have two different sets of DNA. Is this just fiction or does it really happen in humans?

Formation of Chimeras and Mosaics

The ways in which chimeras can form are as follows.

• Fraternal twin embryos fuse together to become a single embryo, so many cell types could be mixed.
• Fraternal twins share a blood supply and their blood mixes. Blood stem cells from one settles in the bone marrow of the other so that blood of the other twin can continue to form. This type of chimera is blood only.   [4]

Mosaicism occurs when there is an error in the way the cells divide in the embryo. Both the original and the mutated cells split and, if this occurs early enough, cells end up with a different genotype.[4]

Examples

A real example of this happened in 2002 when an American lady, Lydia Fairchild was tested and found to not be the mother of her children. On further testing of a sample taken from a different part of her body, her DNA matched the children's.

An earlier record, from 1998, is of a lady who needed a kidney transplant. Her bone marrow showed just one set of DNA yet other cells showed two separate sets.  She had all four sets of chromosomes from her parents. All her cells were XX so most likely two eggs, fertilised with X chromosomes, merged.[8]

It is possible that XY and XX embryos merging form what was called a hermaphrodite but is now referred to as intersex in medicine.

Problems with Forensics

Identifying fathers, body parts from a plane crash, or blood from a crime scene might be wrong if it is unknown that someone is a chimera.

The probability of chimeras is unknown, but with the event of IVF, it is more likely as twins are required for it to occur.

Sources

1. Wikipedia: intersex
2.  Wikipedia: hermaphrodite
3.  Wikipedia: Lydia Fairchild
4.  Stanford University: Understanding Genetics -Ask a Geneticist 
5. http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/M/Mosaics.html#TetragameticHuman 
6. Flatrock: dual identities
7. Wikipedia: Blood type history 
8. NPR podcast on chimerism
9. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2011/04/21/the-many-yous-in-you-–-what-lydia-fairchild-has-in-common-with-a-sponge-and-an-anemone/

20th April 2011 Inactivity

Unconscious Activity

Since weight gain is about eating more calories than we exercise away, when all else is the same (weight, height, amount of exercise, calorie intake) why do some gain and some lose weight?

In a study [1] on metabolism in 2005, it was discovered, using sensors, that those who don't gain weight are subconsciously moving much more than those that do. This is called non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT) which includes every day activity which isn't specifically classified as 'exercises' such as walking to work, typing, gardening, or just fidgeting [2]. It was found that the obese people sat for on average 10 hours, which was two hours longer than the lean people. [1, 4]. Farmers in Jamaica had only 5 hours sitting. They had 5000 daily  movements compared with only 1500 for the obese group.

Even when lean people gained weight or obese people lost weight, their NEAT activity was unchanged. The extra NEAT activity of the lean people could burn 350 calories a day. It is suggested that the reason for this could be biological as no change was noted with the change of lean/obesity levels.[2]  This research was done with mildly obese people. I wonder if the same holds true for very obese people losing a lot of weight since it's a lot easier to actually move when you don't have a lot of extra mass getting in the way! I also wonder if it really is biological or just a case of habits taking time to change? Research has been done on looking at the possible neural and endocrine systems that control NEAT which could perhaps indicate a way treat obesity.[3]

Well ok, so some people are 'naturally' more active than others and they burn more calories so don't put on weight. So how about I just carry on sitting a lot and exercise a bit more? Does that compensate for the sitting?

Sitting

There are several things that happen to us when we sit, apart from the obvious lowering of calorie expenditure.

•  Metabolic rate drops to around 1 per minute compared with 3 for walking about.
•  Insulin effectiveness drops (by 40%) with 24 hours of inactivity when calories intake is not reduced, increasing the risk of metabolic disease and thus type 2 diabetes. [5, 9]
•  The enzymes responsible for breaking down lipids and triglycerides drop causing  HDL (good cholesterol) to fall as well. [4]

In a study of Americans, the mortality rate of men who spend 6+ hours of their leisure time per day sitting was 20% higher than the men who sat for 3 or less hours. For women, it was around 40% higher. [4]

A recent study of Australians showed a positive correlation between the amount of time spent watching TV, indicating a sedentary lifestyle, and the overall risk of death, as well as an increased risk of cardiovascular disease.[10]

The Answer?

Apart from not sitting as much, which may not be possible in work situations, we can increase our NEAT activities by fidgeting, maybe standing up more often, or perhaps install a standing or treadmill desk.[4]

We need to look at our environment and see how we can make changes to encourage ourselves to move more. [4]

Sources

1. Science. 2005 Jan 28;307(5709):584-6. Interindividual variation in posture allocation: possible role in human obesity. Levine JA, Lanningham-Foster LM, McCrady SK, Krizan AC, Olson LR, Kane PH, Jensen MD, Clark MM (Abstract)
2. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2002 Dec;16(4):679-702. Non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT). Levine JA (Abstract)
3.  J Neuroendocrinol. 2007 Dec;19(12):923-40.Central neural and endocrine mechanisms of non-exercise activity thermogenesis and their potential impact on obesity.Novak CM, Levine JA (Abstract)
4. New York Times: Is Sitting a Lethal Activity?
5. Metabolism. 2010 Nov 9. [Epub ahead of print] Effects of 1 day of inactivity on insulin action in healthy men and women: interaction with energy intake. Stephens BR, Granados K, Zderic TW, Hamilton MT, Braun B (Abstract)
6. http://scienceblogs.com/thepumphandle/2011/04/stand_up_before_you_hurt_yours.php
7. http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=can-sitting-too-much-kill-you-2011-01-06
8. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011 Jan 18;57(3):292-9. Screen-based entertainment time, all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular events: population-based study with ongoing mortality and hospital events follow-up. Stamatakis E, Hamer M, Dunstan DW. (Abstract)
9. Am J Prev Med. 2010 Oct;39(4):379-88 Occupational sitting and health risks: a systematic review. van Uffelen JG, Wong J, Chau JY, van der Ploeg HP, Riphagen I, Gilson ND, Burton NW, Healy GN, Thorp AA, Clark BK, Gardiner PA, Dunstan DW, Bauman A, Owen N, Brown WJ. (Review of Studies April 2009 - Abstract)
10. Circulation. 2010;121:384-391Epidemiology and Prevention Television Viewing Time and Mortality The Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle Study (AusDiab) 

14th April 2011 Breast Cancer

Healthy breast cells produce the immune protein interleukin-25 which locks onto nearby cells with the receptor for it. This initiates a self-destruct in the cell. Normal cells do not have this receptor but 19% of cancer cells have been found to, including more aggressive ones.

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2011/04/healthy-breast-cells-police-fo.html

14th April 2011 Broccoli & Lung Disease

Super broccoli does it again! It has been found to help clear out lungs in people with lung disease.

Sulphoraphane, a compound found in broccoli and cauliflower when they are damage such as by chewing, has been found to reactivate a chemical pathway in the lungs. This pathway is called NRF2, and is involved in macrophage activation. Macrophages clear the lungs of gunk and bacteria which can cause infection.  This pathway is wiped out by smoking.

It is currently being trialed and will be 3 years before the results are in. Either way, I'm going to carry on eating my broccoli. Yum yum yum!

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20378-broccoli-helps-clear-damaged-lungs.html

12th April 2011 Alcoholic Tendencies

Researchers have found that there is a link between people reporting a 'buzz' from a drink in a blind study and those who later have a tendency to develop an alcohol use disorder.  This suggests that perhaps there is a genetic disposition to overuse of alcohol, and that it may help to be able to warn people early on that they could develop problems


Foretelling Drinking Future From a Buzz

9th April 2011 Carbon Dating & Heart Disease

Due to the nuclear tests in the last century, the date fat has been laid down in arteries can be measured. Tests have been done which determine the year of birth of people born in the 1960s onwards, in a particular region of USA, to within about 18 months by looking at tooth enamel.

 How Cold-War Nuclear Tests Are Giving Hope to Heart-Disease Patients

Measuring atomic bomb-derived 14C levels in human remains to determine Year of Birth and/or Year of Death

5th April 2011 MRSA and Copper

MRSA dies on copper within about 9 minutes so it makes an ideal material for door handles and so on in hospitals. [New Scientist]

4th April 2011 The Discovery as Radiation as a Cancer Treatment

Since I read the an article a few days ago on the Radiation Girls, I've been wondering how on earth anyone thought of using radiation to treat cancer.  Well today my luck was in as  Orac mentioned it in his blog.

A young man by the name of Emile Grubbe was so impressed by Roentgen's discovery of x-rays that he began to experiment himself. He began to suffer from radiation dermatitis of his hands and neck.  He linked these lesions to the radiation.  One of his colleagues suggested he try to use them to treat carcinoma, which he did with almost immediate success. In February of 1896, he founded the first radiation therapy facility in Chicago.

24th March 2011 - Human Exoskeletons & Motivation

• Human Exoskeletons - TED talk of the day. Yesterday I was wondering about replacement arms and today I see this which gives hope to those who can not walk.  It is an exoskeleton which for the military, allows people to carry 200lb over long distances. It has extra 'legs' attached to the person's legs to take the load, but it does not limit movement.  There is also, more exciting to me, an exoskeleton, which is just put on externally allowing someone to walk.  They show a lady who is paralysed from the pelvis down using this to walk.  I wonder how much movement is necessary to be able to use this.[TEDtalk] [Longer TEDtalk on eLEGS]

• Motivation - What motivates us to do well at creative tasks? Money? Nope, mastering things and choosing what we do ourselves.  Research has shown that larger financial rewards lead to weaker performances when creativity and ideas are required.  It seems that so long as money isn't an issue, people work better when the motivation is intrinsic. Different parts of the brain are responsible for external and internal motivations  and their effects on our behaviour are very different.[Animated presentation on money & motivation]
  Update: New Scientist
  

  But the work of Deci and others suggests the problem with bonuses runs far deeper than poor scheme design or cheating. In 1971, he asked students to solve puzzles, with some receiving cash prizes for doing well and others getting nothing. Deci found those offered cash were less likely to keep working on puzzles after they had done enough to get paid.
  
  Two years later, a team led by Mark Lepper of Stanford University, California, asked children aged between 3 and 5 years old to draw with felt-tip pens. Some were told they would receive a special ribbon as a prize for doing so, and duly received it. These children were less likely to choose to draw with felt-tip pens when they were later given a free choice of activities. No such effect was seen with children who were not offered a reward, whether they subsequently received an unexpected one or not (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol 28, p 129).
  
  These studies suggest that offering rewards can stop people doing things for the sheer joy of it, an idea known as the overjustification effect. This was the basis for a series of books by Kohn in which he argues that rewarding children, students and workers with grades, incentives and other "bribes" leads to inferior work in the long run.
  
  Those who believe in the power of bonuses fail to distinguish between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation - wanting to do something because you like it in its own right versus doing something because you want the reward, Kohn says. "It's not just that these two are different, it's that they are often inversely related. The more you reward people for doing something, the more their intrinsic motivation tends to decline."
  
  A "do this and get that" approach might improve performance in the short term, but over longer periods it will always fail, Kohn says, as it turns play into work and work into drudgery. Bonus recipients inevitably play safe, become less creative, collaborate less and feel less valued, he adds.