Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Making Science More Better For You on 04/30/08
Headline of the day
Three-year-old boy takes 1st place in Minnesota mullet contest (Breitbart.,com)
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Making Science More Better For You on 04/23/08
Headlines of the day
Carnie has part of his thumb bitten off, is beaten with a stick (The Obscure Store)
We heard they were chanting, “Not one of us. We don’t accept you.”
Police say Marathon runner tried to kill wife (MetroWest Daily News
We presume their argument had run its course.
Celebrity grizzly kills Hollywood trainer (MSNBC)
More pilates than he could bear?
They just swim around all day, sipping tepid tea and reading Virginia Wolf.
No sex for all-girl fish species
A fish species, which is all female, has survived for 70,000 years without reproducing sexually, experts believe.
The BBC reports that scientists from the University of Edinburgh think the Amazon Molly may be employing special genetic survival "tricks" to avoid becoming extinct.
The species, found in Texas and Mexico, interacts with males of other species to trigger its reproduction process.
The offspring are clones of their mother and do not inherit any of the male's DNA.
Typically, when creatures reproduce asexually, harmful changes creep into their genes over many generations.
The species will eventually have problems reproducing and can often fall victim to extinction.
Scientists at Edinburgh University have been studying complex mathematical models on a highly powerful computing system to look at the case of the Amazon Molly.
Researchers calculated the time to extinction for the fish based on modelling genetic changes over many thousands of generations.
They are now able to say conclusively, for the first time, the fish ought to have become extinct within the past 70,000 years, based on the current simple models.
Scientists believe the fish, which are still thriving in rivers in south-east Texas and north-east Mexico, are using special genetic survival "tricks" to help them stay alive.
One theory is that the fish may occasionally be taking some of the DNA from the males that trigger reproduction, in order to refresh their gene pool.
Species tricks
Dr Laurence Loewe, of the university's School of Biological Sciences, said: "What we have shown now is that this fish really has something special going on and that some special tricks exist to help this fish survive.
"Maybe there is still occasional sex with strangers that keeps the species alive. Future research may give us some answers."
He added that their findings could also help them understand more about how other creatures operate.
"I think one of the interesting things is that we are learning more about how other species might use these tricks as well," he said.
"It might have a more general importance."
We figure this adds a whole new dimension to the term “cold fish.”
Carnie has part of his thumb bitten off, is beaten with a stick (The Obscure Store)
We heard they were chanting, “Not one of us. We don’t accept you.”
Police say Marathon runner tried to kill wife (MetroWest Daily News
We presume their argument had run its course.
Celebrity grizzly kills Hollywood trainer (MSNBC)
More pilates than he could bear?
They just swim around all day, sipping tepid tea and reading Virginia Wolf.
No sex for all-girl fish species
A fish species, which is all female, has survived for 70,000 years without reproducing sexually, experts believe.
The BBC reports that scientists from the University of Edinburgh think the Amazon Molly may be employing special genetic survival "tricks" to avoid becoming extinct.
The species, found in Texas and Mexico, interacts with males of other species to trigger its reproduction process.
The offspring are clones of their mother and do not inherit any of the male's DNA.
Typically, when creatures reproduce asexually, harmful changes creep into their genes over many generations.
The species will eventually have problems reproducing and can often fall victim to extinction.
Scientists at Edinburgh University have been studying complex mathematical models on a highly powerful computing system to look at the case of the Amazon Molly.
Researchers calculated the time to extinction for the fish based on modelling genetic changes over many thousands of generations.
They are now able to say conclusively, for the first time, the fish ought to have become extinct within the past 70,000 years, based on the current simple models.
Scientists believe the fish, which are still thriving in rivers in south-east Texas and north-east Mexico, are using special genetic survival "tricks" to help them stay alive.
One theory is that the fish may occasionally be taking some of the DNA from the males that trigger reproduction, in order to refresh their gene pool.
Species tricks
Dr Laurence Loewe, of the university's School of Biological Sciences, said: "What we have shown now is that this fish really has something special going on and that some special tricks exist to help this fish survive.
"Maybe there is still occasional sex with strangers that keeps the species alive. Future research may give us some answers."
He added that their findings could also help them understand more about how other creatures operate.
"I think one of the interesting things is that we are learning more about how other species might use these tricks as well," he said.
"It might have a more general importance."
We figure this adds a whole new dimension to the term “cold fish.”
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Making Science More Better For You on 04/16/08
Headlines of the day
If you give Hamas a cookie. (Gawker) (actually from 04/15/08)
The clown community takes another hit with man's porn arrest (The Obscure Store)
Clearly, another icky day in clown town. So sad.
A political interlude…
We’re starting to get the feeling that whenever Bill Clinton looks in a mirror, he sees Jimmy Carter looking back at him. All this flailing about so he can prove he’s still relevant. Wouldn’t a gold chain and a Ferrari be easier on everyone?
It would appear that we often confuse having reasons with making decisions. Guess it really is all about the it, the eagle and the super eagle. And while we are on the topic, can anyone tell us why we ordered the roast beef?
Decision-making May Be Surprisingly Unconscious Activity
ScienceDaily (Apr. 15, 2008) — Contrary to what most of us would like to believe, decision-making may be a process handled to a large extent by unconscious mental activity. A team of scientists has unraveled how the brain actually unconsciously prepares our decisions. Even several seconds before we consciously make a decision its outcome can be predicted from unconscious activity in the brain.
This is shown in a study by scientists from the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences in Leipzig, in collaboration with the Charité University Hospital and the Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience in Berlin. The researchers from the group of Professor John-Dylan Haynes used a brain scanner to investigate what happens in the human brain just before a decision is made. "Many processes in the brain occur automatically and without involvement of our consciousness. This prevents our mind from being overloaded by simple routine tasks. But when it comes to decisions we tend to assume they are made by our conscious mind. This is questioned by our current findings."
In the study, published in Nature Neuroscience, participants could freely decide if they wanted to press a button with their left or right hand. They were free to make this decision whenever they wanted, but had to remember at which time they felt they had made up their mind. The aim of the experiment was to find out what happens in the brain in the period just before the person felt the decision was made. The researchers found that it was possible to predict from brain signals which option participants would take up to seven seconds before they consciously made their decision. Normally researchers look at what happens when the decision is made, but not at what happens several seconds before. The fact that decisions can be predicted so long before they are made is a astonishing finding.
This unprecedented prediction of a free decision was made possible by sophisticated computer programs that were trained to recognize typical brain activity patterns preceding each of the two choices. Micropatterns of activity in the frontopolar cortex were predictive of the choices even before participants knew which option they were going to choose. The decision could not be predicted perfectly, but prediction was clearly above chance. This suggests that the decision is unconsciously prepared ahead of time but the final decision might still be reversible.
"Most researchers investigate what happens when people have to decide immediately, typically as a rapid response to an event in our environment. Here we were focusing on the more interesting decisions that are made in a more natural, self-paced manner", Haynes explains.
More than 20 years ago the American brain scientist Benjamin Libet found a brain signal, the so-called "readiness-potential" that occurred a fraction of a second before a conscious decision. Libet’s experiments were highly controversial and sparked a huge debate. Many scientists argued that if our decisions are prepared unconsciously by the brain, then our feeling of "free will" must be an illusion. In this view, it is the brain that makes the decision, not a person’s conscious mind. Libet’s experiments were particularly controversial because he found only a brief time delay between brain activity and the conscious decision.
In contrast, Haynes and colleagues now show that brain activity predicts -- even up to 7 seconds ahead of time -- how a person is going to decide. But they also warn that the study does not finally rule out free will: "Our study shows that decisions are unconsciously prepared much longer ahead than previously thought. But we do not know yet where the final decision is made. We need to investigate whether a decision prepared by these brain areas can still be reversed."
Free will is an idle threat. Pass it on.
We guess the reason the researchers think they discovered something is that they don’t own any Motorhead albums. How do you say “dude” in Neanderthal, anyways.
Neanderthals speak again after 30,000 years
LONDON, Apr. 16, 2008 (Reuters) — Neanderthals have spoken out for the first time in 30,000 years, with the help of scientists who have simulated their voices using fossil evidence and a computer synthesizer.
Robert McCarthy, an anthropologist at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton, used new reconstructions of Neanderthal vocal tracts to work out how they would have sounded, NewScientist.com reported on Wednesday.
The conclusion is that Neanderthals spoke, but sounded rather different to us. Specifically, the ancient humans' lacked the "quantal vowel" sounds that underlie modern speech and which provide cues that help speakers understand one another.
In contrast to a modern human "e," the Neanderthal version lacks a quantal hallmark, which helps a listener distinguish the word "beat" from "bit," for instance.
To listen to a simulation of the modern human voice, visit: http://media.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/av/dn13672A2.wav
McCarthy, who based his reconstructions on 50,000-year-old fossils from France, aims eventually to simulate an entire Neanderthal sentence.
Neanderthals were a dead-end offshoot of the human line who inhabited Europe and parts of west and central Asia. Researchers believe they survived in Europe until the arrival of modern humans about 30,000 years ago.
They’re not dead, just sleeping.
If you give Hamas a cookie. (Gawker) (actually from 04/15/08)
The clown community takes another hit with man's porn arrest (The Obscure Store)
Clearly, another icky day in clown town. So sad.
A political interlude…
We’re starting to get the feeling that whenever Bill Clinton looks in a mirror, he sees Jimmy Carter looking back at him. All this flailing about so he can prove he’s still relevant. Wouldn’t a gold chain and a Ferrari be easier on everyone?
It would appear that we often confuse having reasons with making decisions. Guess it really is all about the it, the eagle and the super eagle. And while we are on the topic, can anyone tell us why we ordered the roast beef?
Decision-making May Be Surprisingly Unconscious Activity
ScienceDaily (Apr. 15, 2008) — Contrary to what most of us would like to believe, decision-making may be a process handled to a large extent by unconscious mental activity. A team of scientists has unraveled how the brain actually unconsciously prepares our decisions. Even several seconds before we consciously make a decision its outcome can be predicted from unconscious activity in the brain.
This is shown in a study by scientists from the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences in Leipzig, in collaboration with the Charité University Hospital and the Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience in Berlin. The researchers from the group of Professor John-Dylan Haynes used a brain scanner to investigate what happens in the human brain just before a decision is made. "Many processes in the brain occur automatically and without involvement of our consciousness. This prevents our mind from being overloaded by simple routine tasks. But when it comes to decisions we tend to assume they are made by our conscious mind. This is questioned by our current findings."
In the study, published in Nature Neuroscience, participants could freely decide if they wanted to press a button with their left or right hand. They were free to make this decision whenever they wanted, but had to remember at which time they felt they had made up their mind. The aim of the experiment was to find out what happens in the brain in the period just before the person felt the decision was made. The researchers found that it was possible to predict from brain signals which option participants would take up to seven seconds before they consciously made their decision. Normally researchers look at what happens when the decision is made, but not at what happens several seconds before. The fact that decisions can be predicted so long before they are made is a astonishing finding.
This unprecedented prediction of a free decision was made possible by sophisticated computer programs that were trained to recognize typical brain activity patterns preceding each of the two choices. Micropatterns of activity in the frontopolar cortex were predictive of the choices even before participants knew which option they were going to choose. The decision could not be predicted perfectly, but prediction was clearly above chance. This suggests that the decision is unconsciously prepared ahead of time but the final decision might still be reversible.
"Most researchers investigate what happens when people have to decide immediately, typically as a rapid response to an event in our environment. Here we were focusing on the more interesting decisions that are made in a more natural, self-paced manner", Haynes explains.
More than 20 years ago the American brain scientist Benjamin Libet found a brain signal, the so-called "readiness-potential" that occurred a fraction of a second before a conscious decision. Libet’s experiments were highly controversial and sparked a huge debate. Many scientists argued that if our decisions are prepared unconsciously by the brain, then our feeling of "free will" must be an illusion. In this view, it is the brain that makes the decision, not a person’s conscious mind. Libet’s experiments were particularly controversial because he found only a brief time delay between brain activity and the conscious decision.
In contrast, Haynes and colleagues now show that brain activity predicts -- even up to 7 seconds ahead of time -- how a person is going to decide. But they also warn that the study does not finally rule out free will: "Our study shows that decisions are unconsciously prepared much longer ahead than previously thought. But we do not know yet where the final decision is made. We need to investigate whether a decision prepared by these brain areas can still be reversed."
Free will is an idle threat. Pass it on.
We guess the reason the researchers think they discovered something is that they don’t own any Motorhead albums. How do you say “dude” in Neanderthal, anyways.
Neanderthals speak again after 30,000 years
LONDON, Apr. 16, 2008 (Reuters) — Neanderthals have spoken out for the first time in 30,000 years, with the help of scientists who have simulated their voices using fossil evidence and a computer synthesizer.
Robert McCarthy, an anthropologist at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton, used new reconstructions of Neanderthal vocal tracts to work out how they would have sounded, NewScientist.com reported on Wednesday.
The conclusion is that Neanderthals spoke, but sounded rather different to us. Specifically, the ancient humans' lacked the "quantal vowel" sounds that underlie modern speech and which provide cues that help speakers understand one another.
In contrast to a modern human "e," the Neanderthal version lacks a quantal hallmark, which helps a listener distinguish the word "beat" from "bit," for instance.
To listen to a simulation of the modern human voice, visit: http://media.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/av/dn13672A2.wav
McCarthy, who based his reconstructions on 50,000-year-old fossils from France, aims eventually to simulate an entire Neanderthal sentence.
Neanderthals were a dead-end offshoot of the human line who inhabited Europe and parts of west and central Asia. Researchers believe they survived in Europe until the arrival of modern humans about 30,000 years ago.
They’re not dead, just sleeping.
Monday, April 14, 2008
Making Science More Better For You on 04/14/08
Headline of the day
Parents Fight Over Which Gang Toddler Should Join
Police: Mother A Crip, Father A Westside Baller (ABC 7 In Denver)
It's just like being the child of a Deke—either way, the kid's a legacy.
We got it. How about if we develop a TV show around this called “Pimp Your Kid?”
‘we have the technology that can make a cloned child’
By Steve Connor, Science Editor/The INDEPENDENT/U.K.
Monday, 14 April 2008
A new form of cloning has been developed that is easier to carry out than the technique used to create Dolly the sheep, raising fears that it may one day be used on human embryos to produce "designer" babies.
Scientists who used the procedure to create baby mice from the skin cells of adult animals have found it to be far more efficient than the Dolly technique, with fewer side effects, which makes it more acceptable for human use.
The mice were made by inserting skin cells of an adult animal into early embryos produced by in-vitro fertilisation (IVF). Some of the resulting offspring were partial clones but some were full clones – just like Dolly.
Unlike the Dolly technique, however, the procedure is so simple and efficient that it has raised fears that it will be seized on by IVF doctors to help infertile couples who are eager to have their own biological children.
One scientist said this weekend that a maverick attempt to perform the technique on humans is now too real to ignore. "It's unethical and unsafe, but someone may be doing it today," said Robert Lanza, chief scientific officer of American biotechnology company Advanced Cell Technology.
"Cloning isn't here now, but with this new technique we have the technology that can actually produce a child. If this was applied to humans it would be enormously important and troublesome," said Dr Lanza, whose company has pioneered developments in stem cells and cell reprogramming.
"It raises the same issues as reproductive cloning and although the technology for reproductive cloning in humans doesn't exist, with this breakthrough we now have a working technology whereby anyone, young or old, fertile or infertile, straight or gay can pass on their genes to a child by using just a few skin cells," he said.
The technique involves the genetic reprogramming of skin cells so they revert to an embryonic-like state. Last year, when the breakthrough was used on human skin cells for the first time, it was lauded by the Catholic Church and President George Bush as a morally acceptable way of producing embryonic stem cells without having to create or destroy human embryos.
However, the same technique has already been used in another way to reproduce offspring of laboratory mice that are either full clones or genetic "chimeras" of the adult mouse whose skin cells were reprogrammed.
The experiments on mice demonstrated that it is now possible in principle to take a human skin cell, reprogramme it back to its embryonic state and then insert it into an early human embryo. The resulting child would share some of the genes of the person who supplied the skin tissue, as well as the genes of the embryo's two parents.
These offspring are chimeras – a genetic mix of two or more individuals – because some of their cells derive from the embryo and some from the skin cell. Technically, such a child would have three biological parents. Human chimeras occur naturally when two embryos fuse in the womb and such people are often normal and healthy. Dr Lanza says there is no reason to believe that a human chimera created by the new technique would be unhealthy.
Furthermore, studies on mice have shown that it is possible to produce fully cloned offspring that are 100 per cent genetically identical to the adult. This was achieved by using a type of defective mouse embryo with four sets of chromosomes instead of the normal two.
This "tetraploid" embryo only developed into the placenta of the foetus and when it was injected with a reprogrammed skin cell, the rest of the foetus developed from this single cell to become a full clone of the adult animal whose skin was used.
None of the scientists working on cell reprogramming to produce induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells – as the embryonic cells are known – plan to use it for human reproductive medicine. Their main aim is to produce stem cells for the therapeutic treatment of conditions such as Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and stroke.
However, Dr Lanza said that the mouse experiments his company had done demonstrated how easily the technology could be used to produce cloned or chimeric babies by inserting iPS cells into early human embryos. This is not banned in many countries, where legislation has not kept pace with scientific developments.
In Britain, the Human Tissue and Embryos Bill going through Parliament does not mention the iPS technique, although experts believe that the new law should make it illegal because it involves genetic modification of cells that become part of the embryo.
"In addition to the great therapeutic promise demonstrated by this technology, the same technology opens a whole new can of worms," Dr Lanza said.
"At this point there are no laws or regulations for this kind of thing and the bizarre thing is that the Catholic Church and other traditional stem-cell opponents think this technology is great when in reality it could in the end become one of their biggest nightmares," he said. "It is quite possible that the real legacy of this whole new programming technology is that it will be introducing the era of designer babies.
"So for instance if we had a few skin cells from Albert Einstein, or anyone else in the world, you could have a child that is say 10 per cent or 70 per cent Albert Einstein by just injecting a few of their cells into an embryo," he said.
We wonder who is more excited at the thought—the NFL or the pharmaceutical companies.
Parents Fight Over Which Gang Toddler Should Join
Police: Mother A Crip, Father A Westside Baller (ABC 7 In Denver)
It's just like being the child of a Deke—either way, the kid's a legacy.
We got it. How about if we develop a TV show around this called “Pimp Your Kid?”
‘we have the technology that can make a cloned child’
By Steve Connor, Science Editor/The INDEPENDENT/U.K.
Monday, 14 April 2008
A new form of cloning has been developed that is easier to carry out than the technique used to create Dolly the sheep, raising fears that it may one day be used on human embryos to produce "designer" babies.
Scientists who used the procedure to create baby mice from the skin cells of adult animals have found it to be far more efficient than the Dolly technique, with fewer side effects, which makes it more acceptable for human use.
The mice were made by inserting skin cells of an adult animal into early embryos produced by in-vitro fertilisation (IVF). Some of the resulting offspring were partial clones but some were full clones – just like Dolly.
Unlike the Dolly technique, however, the procedure is so simple and efficient that it has raised fears that it will be seized on by IVF doctors to help infertile couples who are eager to have their own biological children.
One scientist said this weekend that a maverick attempt to perform the technique on humans is now too real to ignore. "It's unethical and unsafe, but someone may be doing it today," said Robert Lanza, chief scientific officer of American biotechnology company Advanced Cell Technology.
"Cloning isn't here now, but with this new technique we have the technology that can actually produce a child. If this was applied to humans it would be enormously important and troublesome," said Dr Lanza, whose company has pioneered developments in stem cells and cell reprogramming.
"It raises the same issues as reproductive cloning and although the technology for reproductive cloning in humans doesn't exist, with this breakthrough we now have a working technology whereby anyone, young or old, fertile or infertile, straight or gay can pass on their genes to a child by using just a few skin cells," he said.
The technique involves the genetic reprogramming of skin cells so they revert to an embryonic-like state. Last year, when the breakthrough was used on human skin cells for the first time, it was lauded by the Catholic Church and President George Bush as a morally acceptable way of producing embryonic stem cells without having to create or destroy human embryos.
However, the same technique has already been used in another way to reproduce offspring of laboratory mice that are either full clones or genetic "chimeras" of the adult mouse whose skin cells were reprogrammed.
The experiments on mice demonstrated that it is now possible in principle to take a human skin cell, reprogramme it back to its embryonic state and then insert it into an early human embryo. The resulting child would share some of the genes of the person who supplied the skin tissue, as well as the genes of the embryo's two parents.
These offspring are chimeras – a genetic mix of two or more individuals – because some of their cells derive from the embryo and some from the skin cell. Technically, such a child would have three biological parents. Human chimeras occur naturally when two embryos fuse in the womb and such people are often normal and healthy. Dr Lanza says there is no reason to believe that a human chimera created by the new technique would be unhealthy.
Furthermore, studies on mice have shown that it is possible to produce fully cloned offspring that are 100 per cent genetically identical to the adult. This was achieved by using a type of defective mouse embryo with four sets of chromosomes instead of the normal two.
This "tetraploid" embryo only developed into the placenta of the foetus and when it was injected with a reprogrammed skin cell, the rest of the foetus developed from this single cell to become a full clone of the adult animal whose skin was used.
None of the scientists working on cell reprogramming to produce induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells – as the embryonic cells are known – plan to use it for human reproductive medicine. Their main aim is to produce stem cells for the therapeutic treatment of conditions such as Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and stroke.
However, Dr Lanza said that the mouse experiments his company had done demonstrated how easily the technology could be used to produce cloned or chimeric babies by inserting iPS cells into early human embryos. This is not banned in many countries, where legislation has not kept pace with scientific developments.
In Britain, the Human Tissue and Embryos Bill going through Parliament does not mention the iPS technique, although experts believe that the new law should make it illegal because it involves genetic modification of cells that become part of the embryo.
"In addition to the great therapeutic promise demonstrated by this technology, the same technology opens a whole new can of worms," Dr Lanza said.
"At this point there are no laws or regulations for this kind of thing and the bizarre thing is that the Catholic Church and other traditional stem-cell opponents think this technology is great when in reality it could in the end become one of their biggest nightmares," he said. "It is quite possible that the real legacy of this whole new programming technology is that it will be introducing the era of designer babies.
"So for instance if we had a few skin cells from Albert Einstein, or anyone else in the world, you could have a child that is say 10 per cent or 70 per cent Albert Einstein by just injecting a few of their cells into an embryo," he said.
We wonder who is more excited at the thought—the NFL or the pharmaceutical companies.
Friday, April 11, 2008
Making Science More Better For You on 04/11/08
"Yeah, and we’re going to keep it up until you put some clothes on and quit walking around naked. And while you're at it, we want you to play the Stooges record “Fun House,” real loud."
Aliens Attacking Bosnian Man with Meteorites
By Bill Christensen
Five meteorites have fallen on Radivoje Lajic's house in the past six months. There is only one possible conclusion. Lajic says:
"I am obviously being targeted by extraterrestrials. I don't know what I have done to annoy them but there is no other explanation that makes sense. The chance of being hit by a meteorite is so small that getting hit five times has to be deliberate."
Belgrade University scientists have confirmed that all of the rocks presented to them by Lajic are meteorites.
The first meteorite smashed into his house last November. Since that time, four more have hit his home.
Lajic has since installed a steel-girder reinforced roof on his home in Gornja Lamovite.
"I am being targeted by aliens. They are playing games with me. I don't know why they are doing this."
Although this story is somewhat hard to believe (it would be helpful to see the meteors in situ, having blown through the house, for example), it is as good a reason as any to discuss orbital kinetic energy weapons.
A tip of our hat to our Kansas Konnection for the story.
Aliens Attacking Bosnian Man with Meteorites
By Bill Christensen
Five meteorites have fallen on Radivoje Lajic's house in the past six months. There is only one possible conclusion. Lajic says:
"I am obviously being targeted by extraterrestrials. I don't know what I have done to annoy them but there is no other explanation that makes sense. The chance of being hit by a meteorite is so small that getting hit five times has to be deliberate."
Belgrade University scientists have confirmed that all of the rocks presented to them by Lajic are meteorites.
The first meteorite smashed into his house last November. Since that time, four more have hit his home.
Lajic has since installed a steel-girder reinforced roof on his home in Gornja Lamovite.
"I am being targeted by aliens. They are playing games with me. I don't know why they are doing this."
Although this story is somewhat hard to believe (it would be helpful to see the meteors in situ, having blown through the house, for example), it is as good a reason as any to discuss orbital kinetic energy weapons.
A tip of our hat to our Kansas Konnection for the story.
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Making Science More Better For You on 04/09/08
"Well it's different for me. For one thing, I'm a doctor and for another, I'm only doing this for science, so that makes it different. It's not like I'm doing this to get high."
Scientists take drugs to boost brain power: study (AP)
Twenty percent of scientists admit to using performance-enhancing prescription drugs for non-medical reasons, according to a survey released Wednesday by Nature, Britain's top science journal.
The overwhelming majority of these med-taking brainiacs said they indulged in order to "improve concentration," and 60 percent said they did so on a daily or weekly basis.
The 1,427 respondents -- most of them in the United States -- completed an informal, online survey posted on the "Nature Network" Web forum, a discussion site for scientists operated by the Nature Publishing Group.
More than a third said that they would feel pressure to give their children such drugs if they knew other kids at school were also taking them.
"These are academics working in scientific institutions," Ruth Francis, who handles press relations for the group, told AFP.
The survey focused on three drugs widely available by prescription or via the Internet.
Ritalin, a trade name for methylphenidate, is a stimulant normally used to treat attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, especially in children. Modafinil -- marketed at Provigil -- is prescribed to treat sleep disorders, but is also effective against general fatigue and jet lag.
Both medications are common currency on college campuses, used as "study aids" to sharpen performance and wakefulness.
"It doesn't seem to be causing too much trouble since most [students] use the drugs not to get high but to function better," Brian Doyle, a clinical pyschiatrist at Georgetown University Medical Centre, told a US newspaper last month. "When exams are over, they go back to normal and stop abusing the drugs."
Other experts expressed more concern about what the survey revealed.
"It alerted us to the fact that scientists, like others, are looking for short cuts," Wilson Compton, director of epidemiology and prevention research at the US National Institute for Drug Abuse (NIDA), told AFP.
Ritalin, he noted, can become addictive, even if it has proven safe and effective when taken as prescribed.
The third class of drugs included in the survey was beta blockers, prescribed for cardiac arrhythmia and popular among performers due to its anti-anxiety effect.
Of the 288 scientists who said that had taken one or more of these drugs outside of a medical context, three-fifths had used Ritalin, and nearly half Provigil. Only 15 percent were fans of beta blockers.
More than a third procured their meds via the Internet, with the rest buying them in pharmacy.
Other reasons cited for popping pills were focusing on a specific task, and counteracting jet lag.
Almost 70 percent of 1,258 respondents who answered the question said they would be willing to risk mild side effects in order to "boost your brain power" by taking cognitive-enhancing drugs.
Half of the drug-takers reported such effects, including headaches, jitteriness, anxiety and sleeplessness.
Wilson of the NIDA expressed surprise at the rate of substance abuse shown, but cautioned that the survey did not meet rigorous scientific standards.
"This is a volunteer poll of people responding to an Internet survey. There might be an over-representation," he said.
But previous research has shown that, as the boundary between treating illness and enhancing wellbeing continues to blur, taking performance-boosting products continues to gain in cultural acceptance.
"Like the rise in cosmetic surgery, use of cognitive enhancers is likely to increase as bioethical and psychological concerns are overcome," opined Nature in a commentary.
In the survey, 80 percent of all the scientists -- even those who did not use these drugs -- defended the right of "healthy humans" to take them as work boosters, and more than half said their use should not be restricted, even for university entrance exams.
More than 57 percent of the respondents were 35 years old or younger.
So, do you think that when Bugs Bunny asked , "What's up Doc," he already knew that the Doctor was what was up?
Scientists take drugs to boost brain power: study (AP)
Twenty percent of scientists admit to using performance-enhancing prescription drugs for non-medical reasons, according to a survey released Wednesday by Nature, Britain's top science journal.
The overwhelming majority of these med-taking brainiacs said they indulged in order to "improve concentration," and 60 percent said they did so on a daily or weekly basis.
The 1,427 respondents -- most of them in the United States -- completed an informal, online survey posted on the "Nature Network" Web forum, a discussion site for scientists operated by the Nature Publishing Group.
More than a third said that they would feel pressure to give their children such drugs if they knew other kids at school were also taking them.
"These are academics working in scientific institutions," Ruth Francis, who handles press relations for the group, told AFP.
The survey focused on three drugs widely available by prescription or via the Internet.
Ritalin, a trade name for methylphenidate, is a stimulant normally used to treat attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, especially in children. Modafinil -- marketed at Provigil -- is prescribed to treat sleep disorders, but is also effective against general fatigue and jet lag.
Both medications are common currency on college campuses, used as "study aids" to sharpen performance and wakefulness.
"It doesn't seem to be causing too much trouble since most [students] use the drugs not to get high but to function better," Brian Doyle, a clinical pyschiatrist at Georgetown University Medical Centre, told a US newspaper last month. "When exams are over, they go back to normal and stop abusing the drugs."
Other experts expressed more concern about what the survey revealed.
"It alerted us to the fact that scientists, like others, are looking for short cuts," Wilson Compton, director of epidemiology and prevention research at the US National Institute for Drug Abuse (NIDA), told AFP.
Ritalin, he noted, can become addictive, even if it has proven safe and effective when taken as prescribed.
The third class of drugs included in the survey was beta blockers, prescribed for cardiac arrhythmia and popular among performers due to its anti-anxiety effect.
Of the 288 scientists who said that had taken one or more of these drugs outside of a medical context, three-fifths had used Ritalin, and nearly half Provigil. Only 15 percent were fans of beta blockers.
More than a third procured their meds via the Internet, with the rest buying them in pharmacy.
Other reasons cited for popping pills were focusing on a specific task, and counteracting jet lag.
Almost 70 percent of 1,258 respondents who answered the question said they would be willing to risk mild side effects in order to "boost your brain power" by taking cognitive-enhancing drugs.
Half of the drug-takers reported such effects, including headaches, jitteriness, anxiety and sleeplessness.
Wilson of the NIDA expressed surprise at the rate of substance abuse shown, but cautioned that the survey did not meet rigorous scientific standards.
"This is a volunteer poll of people responding to an Internet survey. There might be an over-representation," he said.
But previous research has shown that, as the boundary between treating illness and enhancing wellbeing continues to blur, taking performance-boosting products continues to gain in cultural acceptance.
"Like the rise in cosmetic surgery, use of cognitive enhancers is likely to increase as bioethical and psychological concerns are overcome," opined Nature in a commentary.
In the survey, 80 percent of all the scientists -- even those who did not use these drugs -- defended the right of "healthy humans" to take them as work boosters, and more than half said their use should not be restricted, even for university entrance exams.
More than 57 percent of the respondents were 35 years old or younger.
So, do you think that when Bugs Bunny asked , "What's up Doc," he already knew that the Doctor was what was up?
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Making Science More Better For You on 04/03/08
Headline of the day
Who’s smarter than the Smithsonian? Well if you’re a fifth-grader, it seems you may have a shot.
5th-Grader Finds Mistake at Smithsonian
ALLEGAN, Mich. (AP) - Is fifth-grader Kenton Stufflebeam smarter than the Smithsonian? The 11-year-old boy, who lives in Allegan but attends Alamo Elementary School near Kalamazoo, went with his family during winter break to the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History in Washington.
Since it opened in 1981, millions of people have paraded past the museum's Tower of Time, a display involving prehistoric time. Not one visitor had reported anything amiss with the exhibit until Kenton noticed that a notation, in bold lettering, identified the Precambrian as an era.
Kenton knew that was wrong. His fifth-grade teacher, John Chapman, had nearly made the same mistake in a classroom earth-science lesson before catching himself.
"I knew Mr. Chapman wouldn't tell all these students" bad information, the boy told the Kalamazoo Gazette for a story published Wednesday.
So Kevin Stufflebeam took his son to the museum's information desk to report Kenton's concern on a comment form. Last week, the boy received a letter from the museum acknowledging that his observation was "spot on."
"The Precambrian is a dimensionless unit of time, which embraces all the time between the origin of Earth and the beginning of the Cambrian Period of geologic time," the letter says.
The solution to the problem would not involve advanced science but rather simply painting over the word "era," the note says.
"We did forward a copy of the comment and our paleobiology department's response to the head of the exhibits department," said Lorraine Ramsdell, educational technician for the museum.
While no previous visitors to the museum had brought up the error, it has long rankled the paleobiology department's staff, who noticed it even before the Tower of Time was erected 27 years ago, she said.
"The question is, why was it put up with that on it in the first place?" Ramsdell said.
Excited as he was to receive the correspondence from museum officials, he couldn't help but point out that it was addressed to Kenton Slufflebeam.
We thought that was the Mezo-whatsis. And just how “pale” is their paleobiology department? Is that a code word.
Is covered with pink gas or blue gas. They grow up so fast.
Scots scientists help to discover 'youngest planet'
By Jamie Beatson
SCOTS astronomers have discovered a baby planet believed to be the youngest yet.
The planet - still in the process of forming and encased in a "womb" of gas and dust - was found by scientists from St Andrews University, who were working with colleagues from England and the US.
It is thought the planet - named HL Taub - could be as little as 1600 years old.
The Earth, by comparison, formed more than 4.6billion years ago.
The planet is located in the constellation of Taurus and is 520 light years away.
Using telescopes located across the US, the researchers spotted it as they monitored the formation of young star HL Tau, which the planet orbits.
Dr Jane Greaves, of the St Andrews University school of physics and astronomy, said the discovery was "amazing" as they weren't even looking for it.
She said: "We caught this planet at its very, very earliest stages of forming - it is an embryo of a planet more than anything else."
Describing the new planet as a "really large ball of gas and dust", she said that it would crunch down over millions of years to the same size as Jupiter.
She added: "We took an image with a group of radio telescopes with much higher detail than anyone has ever managed before.
"The planet is not more than 100,000 years old - that's the equivalent of a day in a human life - but could be as little as 1600 years old.
"We had an inkling that by looking for dust grains - which are rocks the size of your fist - we could see if rocks were coming together around the star to form a planet."
She said it showed that astronomers should be open-minded in the search for an Earth-like planet.
Sex that lasts 1 to 2 minutes is "too short," say therapists
Yeah, but if it lasted longer, they'd be out of a job.Who’s smarter than the Smithsonian? Well if you’re a fifth-grader, it seems you may have a shot.
5th-Grader Finds Mistake at Smithsonian
ALLEGAN, Mich. (AP) - Is fifth-grader Kenton Stufflebeam smarter than the Smithsonian? The 11-year-old boy, who lives in Allegan but attends Alamo Elementary School near Kalamazoo, went with his family during winter break to the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History in Washington.
Since it opened in 1981, millions of people have paraded past the museum's Tower of Time, a display involving prehistoric time. Not one visitor had reported anything amiss with the exhibit until Kenton noticed that a notation, in bold lettering, identified the Precambrian as an era.
Kenton knew that was wrong. His fifth-grade teacher, John Chapman, had nearly made the same mistake in a classroom earth-science lesson before catching himself.
"I knew Mr. Chapman wouldn't tell all these students" bad information, the boy told the Kalamazoo Gazette for a story published Wednesday.
So Kevin Stufflebeam took his son to the museum's information desk to report Kenton's concern on a comment form. Last week, the boy received a letter from the museum acknowledging that his observation was "spot on."
"The Precambrian is a dimensionless unit of time, which embraces all the time between the origin of Earth and the beginning of the Cambrian Period of geologic time," the letter says.
The solution to the problem would not involve advanced science but rather simply painting over the word "era," the note says.
"We did forward a copy of the comment and our paleobiology department's response to the head of the exhibits department," said Lorraine Ramsdell, educational technician for the museum.
While no previous visitors to the museum had brought up the error, it has long rankled the paleobiology department's staff, who noticed it even before the Tower of Time was erected 27 years ago, she said.
"The question is, why was it put up with that on it in the first place?" Ramsdell said.
Excited as he was to receive the correspondence from museum officials, he couldn't help but point out that it was addressed to Kenton Slufflebeam.
We thought that was the Mezo-whatsis. And just how “pale” is their paleobiology department? Is that a code word.
Is covered with pink gas or blue gas. They grow up so fast.
Scots scientists help to discover 'youngest planet'
By Jamie Beatson
SCOTS astronomers have discovered a baby planet believed to be the youngest yet.
The planet - still in the process of forming and encased in a "womb" of gas and dust - was found by scientists from St Andrews University, who were working with colleagues from England and the US.
It is thought the planet - named HL Taub - could be as little as 1600 years old.
The Earth, by comparison, formed more than 4.6billion years ago.
The planet is located in the constellation of Taurus and is 520 light years away.
Using telescopes located across the US, the researchers spotted it as they monitored the formation of young star HL Tau, which the planet orbits.
Dr Jane Greaves, of the St Andrews University school of physics and astronomy, said the discovery was "amazing" as they weren't even looking for it.
She said: "We caught this planet at its very, very earliest stages of forming - it is an embryo of a planet more than anything else."
Describing the new planet as a "really large ball of gas and dust", she said that it would crunch down over millions of years to the same size as Jupiter.
She added: "We took an image with a group of radio telescopes with much higher detail than anyone has ever managed before.
"The planet is not more than 100,000 years old - that's the equivalent of a day in a human life - but could be as little as 1600 years old.
"We had an inkling that by looking for dust grains - which are rocks the size of your fist - we could see if rocks were coming together around the star to form a planet."
She said it showed that astronomers should be open-minded in the search for an Earth-like planet.
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Making Science More Better For You on 04/01/08
Headlines of the day
Football player arrested for trying to pee on the dance floor (The Obscure Store)
EVIL: Group of Third Graders Plot To Attack Teacher (Drudge)
This just in from our pointing out the obvious and calling it science department:
Failure to perform—in public—can be a drag. Film at 11.
Why High School Boys Dodge Gym Class
ScienceDaily (Apr. 1, 2008) — As obesity and inactivity among youth becomes a growing concern for North American families, new research based at The University of Western Ontario is asking why some high school boys are reluctant to participate in Grade 9 health and physical education classes.
And while a majority of the research being publicly debated links the inactivity to television viewing and hours logged on the computer time, Michael Kehler, an associate professor at Western's Faculty of Education, is examining the relationship between perceived masculinity, body image, and health.
In Ontario, all high school students are required to take at least one course in health and physical education. Most boys choose to take the mandatory course in Grade 9. Others postpone the 'Phys Ed' requirement until a later year when the topic is related to health issues and does not include activities in the gymnasium or on the playing field.
Kehler is speaking to young men from the London, Ontario region to better understand the degree body image in adolescent boys is a factor contributing to whether or not they continue pursuing physical activity.
"There appears to be a link between body image, masculinity, and long-term apathy toward physical activity and ultimately one's quality of life," Kehler said.
"So much research has been done examining girls and issues around body image but very little research has explored the relationship between boys, health and body image in secondary schools.
"If a boy is thinner or heavier than he would like to be, the stress and anxiety of participating in physical education may be prohibitive. That anxiety plays out in a number of ways from disinterest to genuine fear of being harassed."
The study, in collaboration with Kevin Wamsley of Western's Faculty of Health Sciences and Michael Atkinson of the University of Loughborough (U.K.), involves one-on-one interviews, as well as observations in physical education classes and weblogging.
"Often boys who don't feel at ease are terrified to go to the locker room or class, fearing they will be mocked for their size, their lack of athletic prowess, or that they will fall victim to homophobia."
Adapted from materials provided by University of Western Ontario.
Yeah, Canada. It must be different up there.
Football player arrested for trying to pee on the dance floor (The Obscure Store)
EVIL: Group of Third Graders Plot To Attack Teacher (Drudge)
This just in from our pointing out the obvious and calling it science department:
Failure to perform—in public—can be a drag. Film at 11.
Why High School Boys Dodge Gym Class
ScienceDaily (Apr. 1, 2008) — As obesity and inactivity among youth becomes a growing concern for North American families, new research based at The University of Western Ontario is asking why some high school boys are reluctant to participate in Grade 9 health and physical education classes.
And while a majority of the research being publicly debated links the inactivity to television viewing and hours logged on the computer time, Michael Kehler, an associate professor at Western's Faculty of Education, is examining the relationship between perceived masculinity, body image, and health.
In Ontario, all high school students are required to take at least one course in health and physical education. Most boys choose to take the mandatory course in Grade 9. Others postpone the 'Phys Ed' requirement until a later year when the topic is related to health issues and does not include activities in the gymnasium or on the playing field.
Kehler is speaking to young men from the London, Ontario region to better understand the degree body image in adolescent boys is a factor contributing to whether or not they continue pursuing physical activity.
"There appears to be a link between body image, masculinity, and long-term apathy toward physical activity and ultimately one's quality of life," Kehler said.
"So much research has been done examining girls and issues around body image but very little research has explored the relationship between boys, health and body image in secondary schools.
"If a boy is thinner or heavier than he would like to be, the stress and anxiety of participating in physical education may be prohibitive. That anxiety plays out in a number of ways from disinterest to genuine fear of being harassed."
The study, in collaboration with Kevin Wamsley of Western's Faculty of Health Sciences and Michael Atkinson of the University of Loughborough (U.K.), involves one-on-one interviews, as well as observations in physical education classes and weblogging.
"Often boys who don't feel at ease are terrified to go to the locker room or class, fearing they will be mocked for their size, their lack of athletic prowess, or that they will fall victim to homophobia."
Adapted from materials provided by University of Western Ontario.
Yeah, Canada. It must be different up there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
