Green Xenon

Hi: I'm thinking of theoretical treatment for obesity and some of it's associated illnesses. This treatment involves the use of strains of bioengineered bacteria. Strain 1 feeds on cholesterol molecules Strain 2 feeds on molecules of free saturated fatty acids Strain 3 feeds on molecules of free trans fatty acids Strain 4 feeds on LDL molecules Strain 5 feeds on IDL molecules Strain 6 feeds on VLDL molecules Strain 7 feeds on acetone* Strain 8 feeds on glucose There are 24 more strains. Strains 9 to 16 do what strains 1 to 8 do, respectively and contain cortisol receptors. Strains 9 to 16 increase their activities in response to cortisol. Strains 17 to 24 do what strains 1 to 8 do, respectively but contain insulin receptors. Strains 17 to 24 increase their activities in response to insulin. Strains 25 to 32 do what strains 1 to 8 do, respectively but contain glucagon receptors. Strains 25 to 32 increase their activities in response to glucagon. All strains are active only in the bloodstream of the patient. They become dormant when out of the blood – this will prevent the strains from attacking molecules present in tissues such as the brain. Each patient has the strains tailored to his/her own body such that his/her immune system doesn’t see the strains as foreign entities. If any strain leaves his/her body and enters the body of another patient, the other patient’s immune system will attack the strain – this prevents the strains from becoming contagious. Strains 1 to 8 are equally active regardless of blood concentrations of cortisol, insulin, or glucagon. However, a higher blood concentration of cortisol will result in more intense activity in strains 9 to 16, while a higher blood concentration of insulin will result in a more intense activity in strains 17 to 24. Finally, a higher blood concentration of glucagon will result in a more intense activity in strains 25 to 32. All strains are made by bioengineering the smallest naturally-existing obligate-anaerobic** bacterium that has all the following qualities: 1. Not gram-negative 2. Free of lipopolysaccharide 3. Non-pathogenic 4. Does not produce or contain any exo- or endo-toxins 5. Is non-allergenic *Why eliminate acetone from the body? This is because acetone is a toxic type of ketone that cannot be used for energy. Acetone is produce as a by-product of fat metabolism. Two other ketones resulting from such metabolism are acetoacetate and beta-hydroxybutyrate. These two ketones can be used for energy by the central nervous system. **Obligate-anaerobic bacteria are used so that their population in the bloodstream can be regulated without relying on the patient's immune system. Obligate-anaerobes cannot tolerate oxygen and will die in the presence of it. This means that the overwhelming majority of these bacteria would survive and thrive in the pulmonary arteries and non-pulmonary veins of the patient. Here is my question. What would be the drawbacks of such therapy -- besides the expense? Acidosis from anaerobic bacterial respiration is one cause of concern that I can foresee. Regards, GX

What causes my confirmation bias? I've spoken to both women and men about my opinion that adults of both genders should treat children in a gender-neutral manner. The women seem to concur. The men, however, seem to be *macho* and would like to believe girls are weaker than boys and that it is the duty of males to ensure that girls are protected while boys are "toughened up" to fight for their own honor. This "machismo" is something I'm strongly against, and all women I've spoken to, are also just as against it. In the summer of 2002, I was watching The O'Reilly Factor. O'Reilly was arguing with a feminist female coach. He walking talking about how a girl died while playing sports with boys. O'Reilly, being the macho imbecile he is, stated that boys are strong and aggressive and that girls are frail. He believed the reason the girl died is simply because she was a girl and couldn't handle "rough play" with the boys. O'Reilly also stated that he and his friends were shaving when they were in 6th grade -- what a bunch of HOGWASH! The lady coach confronted him about his faulty logic and tried to reason with him. She explained to him that the average girl-child is no more weak, delicate, sensitive or innocent than the average boy-child of the same age. She also told him about how the average girl grows faster than the average boy and that this means the girl might be stronger than the boy. As a biology student and a feminist, I totally agree with what that lady said. I felt like smacking O'Reilly head with a fact book. There are some insults I would like to hurt at that illogical nutcase but proper netiquette keeps me from doing such. I pity any children he has.

Sorry to re-open an age-old thread and reiterate but I really feel it necessary to do. I sincerely believe children should be treated in a "mostly" gender-neutral manner by adults of both genders. Most women agree with me. It's the men who usually disagree. Why? By "mostly" I mean I make a one-and-only exception to the genderless treatment of children: I believe males of all ages -- including boy-children -- should be taught to treat adult women better -- by my definition of "better" listed in a previous message in this thread -- than adult men . This will most-likely give men/boys a respect for adult women and will help prevent these males from perpetrating domestic violence against their wives and girlfriends. However, males -- of any age -- should never be taught to treat girl-children "better" than boy-children because this will cause boys to develop an intense and life-long hatred for girls and a hatred for the macho men who teach these boys to defer to girls. This sexism against boy children will likely cause boys to also despise society and it's irrational norms. By "adult" I'm referring those who are 18 or above. By "child", I'm referring to those who are below 18 years of age. Boy = male under 18 Girl = female under 18 Woman = female 18 or above Man = male 18 or above Again I must ask, why is it that most men disagree while most women -- especially feminist women -- agree with my desire for children to be treated in a gender-free manner?

Hi: Let's say I successfully-develop a way to completely and permanently eliminate all my adipose tissues [including the visceral fat cells]. In addition, let's say I take part in the optimum/ideal amounts, durations, intensities, and repetitions of strength-training, flexibility-training -- [such as stretching], and body-building exercises with the optimum/ideal amount of rest in between workouts. However, I do absolutely *no* cardiovascular or aerobic exercises. Let's also say that my diet consists solely of Italian and Indian sweets/desserts. In addition, instead of eating 3 large meals a day, I eat very many amounts of very small variable-sized meals a day in such a manner that I get the ideal amount of protein per day for my muscular health. Last but not least, the meal sizes vary such that the 1st meal of the day is the largest, and the last meal of the day is the smallest. As the day goes on each meal gets smaller. This routine is similar to the "eats breakfast like a king, lunch like a prince, and dinner like a pauper" type of meal plan, except that is involves much larger amounts of much smaller meals. In terms of water, I also get drink the ideal/optimum amount for health [including muscle strength/size]. I also get the optimum amount of sleep each night and wake up at 5:00 AM each morning. Now, it's obvious that sweets/desserts of any kind tend to be rather low in protein. This means that if I'm getting the ideal amount of protein from such foods, I'm taking in too many calories and my body no longer has the option of storing the excess energy as fat!! Important: Please note that the removal of "cells of fat" does *not* entail the removal of all "molecules of fat". There will still be non-cellular fat in the body because this is necessary for certain functions [such as the myelin of nerves]. Final note: All the sweets/desserts are completely natural and organic. They do not involve any entity -- such as pesticides or industrial pollutants -- that would cause them to be considered un-natural or non-organic. No trans fats or margarine either. Lot's of butter and cream, though!! What will happen if I start and maintain this lifestyle -- in terms of diet and exercise -- after my adipocytes are completely and permanently gone? Thanks, GX

Hi: The acetic acid bacterium has an acidic cytoplasm but the nucleus is still pH-neutral. Is it possible for the proteins, DNA/RNA, and other organic molecules of a living cell to somehow adapt to pH of 0? If not, then what is the lowest pH the cell [including the nuclear molecules] can adapt to? Thanks, GX

Ok, blood tests came back. Most is normal, except for the elevated cardiac CRP

The goal here is for the virus to be able to spread within the adipose tissues of the overweight patient but without spreading to: 1. Other parts of the body 2. The environment outside of the body If this worked out, then the patient would trim down completely even if his/her unhealthy diet continued.

1. The virus would not attack neural fat molecules, because these are not fat *cells*. A virus needs an actual living host cell, not a molecule, for survival and reproduction. 2. If the fat reserves in vital organs consist of fat *cells*, then their will be a problem. However, if those reserves are simply non-cellular lipid molecules, then there isn't much to worry about. 3. Is there a way to ensure that the death of fat cells -- due to viral infection -- is in the form of apoptosis and not necrosis? Apoptosis is "clean". Necrosis, on the other hand, involves a significant amount of inflammation. 4. Would the acidosis result directly from the cell death? That is why the virus must be modified -- prior to use as medical treatment -- in such a way that it cannot spread. Is there a way to regulate this? Certain viruses are contagious while others aren't.

Hi: Let's say I bioengineer a virus to infect the adipocytes of obese patients. There are many who desperately want to lose fat-weight at all costs but are too lazy to resist the temptation of junk food. Would my virus assist them in losing weight? What would be the downsides? I have an acquaintance [really a friend of my close friend]. He is at least 350 lbs. I don't even want to get into what his daily routine is like. It's very depressing. He eats likes its no ones business. He takes up the whole back seat of a car. He clearly does not have the will power I have. In a month I was able to lose 20 lbs from 205 to 185. However, this dude is just too driven by his lust for food. As far as I know, he has been this way ever since he was born. I think he and much of the obese world needs some aggressive intervention that does not involve much determination on patient's part. Just think of what would happen if I treated him with this virus. Adipocytes are cells, and viruses need cells in order to reproduce. Why not tweak viruses into attacking those evil cells of fat until they perish? I'm sure many overweight patients would appreciate this viral therapy. The issues are is how to: 1. Attract viruses to the adipocytes only 2. Prevent the viruses from attacking the rest of the body 3. Prevent the immune system from attacking this beneficial virus 4. Prevent the virus from being contagious Once the adipose tissue is gone, my friend's friend can continue to eat whatever he wants and still be slim n' trim. I'm sure what I'm proposing is possible but does anyone else have any input as to what the drawbacks are? Thanks a bunch, GX

I see the perfect solution to this problem: Society [including that of China] needs to allow males to treat a girl with as much discipline, strictness, extremely-high standards, machismo, and extremely high-expectations as they are allowed to treat a boy. Once this happens, families will be more comfortable having girls and female feticide/infanticide will be something of the past.

The eccentricities of my posts are due to my Asperger's syndrome. Not trying to make excuses, just stating the facts. You can read more about it in this message: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/58792-ot-my-disability/ I measured myself on June 19th, I was 205 lbs. Now I'm 185 lbs. I'm put myself on a low-calorie version of the Atkins diet [induction phase]. My diet consists of http://www.gnc.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2612798&clickid=prod_cs and along will full supplementation of a vitamin/mineral complex and additional supplementation of vitamin c, b, biotin, and folic-acid. I just a blood test on Tuesday and the results came back yesterday. Nothing of extreme concern showed up. However, I probably am missing many of the unknown phytonutrients.

Dear all: I'm have a medical condition and would like to give you some information about it. The reason I am posting this message is to help avoid any potential misunderstandings, and assist in open communication about my challenges. I have been diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome (AS). AS is a neurological condition that causes significant impairment in social interactions, attention span, comprehension, data retention, processing speed, reaction time, and executive functions. People with AS perceive the world differently and this can often bring them in conflict with conventional ways of thinking. They have difficulty in reading body language, and interpreting subtle cues. In my situation, I have significant difficulty with natural conversation, reading social cues, and maintaining eye contact. This can lead to a great deal of misunderstanding about my intent or my behavior. For example, I may not always know what to say in social situations, so I may look away or may not say anything. I also may not always respond quickly when asked direct questions, but if given time I am able express my ideas. Another symptom of AS is extreme sensitivity to smell, taste, and tactile sensations -- as well as difficulty in controlling thoughts and emotions. I'm able to control my words and actions but I have great hardship regulating what I think. There are often times intense and persistent "intrusive thoughts" in my psyche which enter and exit whenever they choose, I can't shut them up voluntarily. Sometimes I also subconsciously twiddle my fingers and play with my hair. I apologize profusely if anyone has found any of my messages annoying or offensive. Thank you very much in advance for your understanding, cooperation, and assistance. Best Regards, GX

Women -- as adults -- may work with men. However, as children -- if not aborted or otherwise eliminated -- girls usually have better childhoods than boys -- assuming the adult caretakers are male. If the caretaker is female, then *usually*, the children are treated in a genderless manner. In some cases, women may sympathize with boys and and treat boys preferentially over girls. This is because -- along with aforementioned reasons in my previous post -- these women feel sorry for boys and the stresses placed on boys perpetrated by the "macho man" culture.

Speaking of China... ... Girl-babies are aborted/killed by *women* only. More importantly, here is why girls are removed. In China -- as in most of the world -- men are not allowed to make their daughters work in the fields and do other labor-intensive tasks because society expects men to protect their daughters. However, if a man has a son, the man can work the boy to death and no one will care. Because men are forced to provide this preferential treatment to daughters over sons, the family sees the girl as a waste of time, energy, space, and money. At least, boys maybe forced to work hard and provide for the family, girls will simply take in resources are drain the family empty. This is another example of males being forced by society to treat girls better than boys. As a result, the women of the family realize this and would prefer a boy over a girl.

If that's the case, then why is it only the *males* who are forced -- by societal norms -- to treat girls better than boys? Why are females not mandated to treat girls better than boys? For example, I have a female friend from Guatemala. Her mom favors her brothers over her and her sister and has perpetrated this anti-girl sexism ever since my friend was born. Why? Remember this is a case of a *woman* discriminating against girls and giving boys preferential treatment. Women are allowed to treat children in a genderless manner. Women are also allowed to treat boys better than girls. However, men are forced to always treat girls better than boys. Why? If girls are more important to survival than boys, shouldn't women also treat girls better than boys, like the men do?

Here are some of the symptoms/signs I think I'd experience/display during the process of non-CNS tissues of my body dying: 1. Cold and pale skin -- due to peripheral vasoconstriction caused by the CNS's attempt to draw blood circulation to the inner body and vital organs. 2. Dizziness, vertigo, deafness, tinnitus and loss of the sense of balance -- due to damage to the inner ears and peripheral acoustic nerves. 3. Disruption of voluntary movements -- due to damage of peripheral motor nerves. 4. Numbness preceded by paresthesias -- due to damage of peripheral sensory nerves. 5. The release of pain-relieving endorphins -- due to serious metabolic insult to most of the body. Extreme injuries tends to be painless due to this mechanism. 6. Hallucinations, psychedelic states, dissociation, delirium, out-of-body experiences, near-death experiences and other mental disturbances -- due to the chemicals released as a result of the metabolic starvation. Am I on the right track? Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Soluble fibers will suffice and provide additional benefits. No need for insoluble fibers.

Sorry to be so persistent. However... ...What symptoms/signs would occur prior to non-CNS parts of the body dying -- i.e. just after the heart enter it's instant, complete, and permanent stage of relaxation? What symptoms would occur as the non-CNS parts of the body die? Since the retina is part of the invincible CNS, I'd still be able to see. However, I'd imagine their would be loss of balance and hearing, since the the initial parts of the acoustic nerves are not considered part of the CNS. Anything else?

Let's say the CNS *does* have its own hypothetical source of energy. By magic the CNS's neurons receive all the necessary nutrients and any waste products leave those neurons. This is pretty much what I meant by "invincible". IOW, the CNS is invulnerable to all physical impairments while the rest of the body isn't. Let me also add, in this case, the CNS neurons are invincible but the peripheral nervous system isn't. What symptoms/signs would occur in this situation if the cardiac muscles completely relax and never un-relax again?

Hi: As usual I have a hypothetical sci-fi question. Let's say that my entire central nervous system is somehow made physically-invincible and immortal. What signs and symptoms will occur if -- by magic -- all my cardiac muscles enter a state of sudden, complete, and permanent relaxation and totally ignore any commands from my body's regulatory systems [including its own pacemaker] to un-relax? Thanks, GX

I maybe male. However, as a feminist, I prefer matriarchy over patriarchy. This is because the former tends to treat children in a genderless manner, while the latter usually forces the males of all ages to treat girls better than boys and perpetrates this discrimination bases solely on the gender of the children. Most non-western cultures are patriarchal, which is why their pro-girl sexisms are so much more intense than that of western cultures.

Sort of off-topic but I will add if society accuses a child of rape/molestation and mistreats him as a result of the stigma, then the child will suffer the same psychological and neurological trauma he would suffer from being raped/molested. Personally I think that if an adult accuses a pre-adolescent boy of molesting a girl, then that adult is as sick as a pedophile.

Different variations of the product can be made according to gender, climate, and amount/intensity of physical exercise of the consumer. Ketosis would normally cause undesirable effects through by causing the body to become too acidic for ideal health. However, this issue is addressed by altering my product so that it's acidity is sufficiently decreased and the alkalinity is sufficiently increased such that acidosis is prevented.

The brain adapts to glucose starvation by using ketones for energy.

The results of genetics can sometimes be overridden by environmental factors. In this case, drinking my favorite hypothetical product -- and abstaining from other foods -- will most likely eliminate body fat regardless of the consumer's genetics. The only disadvantage of my product is that it will probably be too expensive for the producer to make and for the general public to purchase.