jimmydasaint

I have recently read about a method for detection of blue and brown colour in Europeans using DNA samples. Apparently the iris colour (eye colour) has different forms of the same gene called alleles. There seem to be a number of alleles for brown or blue iris colour which differ apparently by a single base on the DNA (called Single Nucleotide Polymorphism IIRC).

However the technique is not explained in the abstract well and I want to understand it better, Can someone with a better knowledge help me understand it?

A new era of 'DNA intelligence' is arriving in forensic biology, due to the impending ability to predict externally visible characteristics (EVCs) from biological material such as those found at crime scenes. EVC prediction from forensic samples, or from body parts, is expected to help concentrate police investigations towards finding unknown individuals, at times when conventional DNA profiling fails to provide informative leads. Here we present a robust and sensitive tool, termed IrisPlex, for the accurate prediction of blue and brown eye colour from DNA in future forensic applications. We used the six currently most eye colour-informative single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that previously revealed prevalence-adjusted prediction accuracies of over 90% for blue and brown eye colour in 6168 Dutch Europeans

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20457092

I would suggest that you read the following and it should clarify your thoughts:

http://www.s-cool.co.uk/a-level/biology/biological-molecules-and-enzymes/revise-it/carbohydrates

Additionally, I would be prepared to repeat tests if possible.

Good luck.

I realise that you are posting speculations at present,, and I wish that modern surgery was equipped to perform what you are suggesting. Clearly you believe that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain and can be replicated somehow, Your thoughts are bold and forthright and I think scientists need this type of thinking to bolt them out of dogmatic slumber.

1. I thought immortal cells were mostly grown in vitro and showed properties not common to normal cells with Hayflick limits.

2. Can a computer model consciousness that represents a human brain without thorough mapping of brain functions? I don't know.

3. I think stem cells were found in the brain with a reapir function but someone could correct me on that supposition

What are nanobots? And have any been made that are capable of repair of cells and transport of metabolites? I think we need some expert input here.

Interesting thoughts...

IMHO, I suppose if a machine could be found that was capable of scanning the brain from a distance and then the brain was examined for electrical activity changes in the neurons, then it is feasible. For example, this method, from 2007:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11144-brain-scans-reveal-intentions-of-calculating-minds.html

Well done! I find that there seems to be confusion over the words: "chromatid" and "chromosome" and they tend to be used loosely. The way I see it, all cells have 23 pairs of chromatids before interphase and then the chromatids are doubled after DNA replication before meiosis.

This seems more like a homework question, but I won't get paranoid about that.

Take a look at the animation in the link and, if there is still confusion, tell us where the problem lies.

https://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0072495855/student_view0/chapter28/animation__how_meiosis_works.html

A superb reply and a green mark duly given as deserved. I will get back to you once I have read all the links and figured out what you mean by the "Ship of Theseus" paradox.

No problem. There is evidence that microalgae can turn CO2 into plastic subunits that can later be recovered and turned into plastic.

 

As well as producing hydrocarbons that can be converted into fuels

or plastics some microalgae have unique abilities such as being able

to produce hydrogen gas which can be used in fuel cells to produce

electricity. Others, such as cyanobacteria, might one day be used in

solar panels to generate electricity directly. Algae can grow in very

nutrient rich environments that are toxic to other plants so they could be

used for treating ‘waste waters’, from a range of industrial sources.

http://www.bbsrc.ac.uk/web/FILES/Resources/algal-biofuels.pdf

and this link on bioplastics:

http://bioplasticsnews.com/2014/02/24/bioplastic-made-from-algae/

Also there are microorganisms that can digest plastics, presumably for energetic purposes to answer your initial point:

http://www.mnn.com/green-tech/research-innovations/blogs/boy-discovers-microbe-that-eats-plastic

Coula algae be genetically engineered to do the same? I don't know. I think it is important to look at the metabolic pathways that allow digestion of plastics in bacteria and see if these can be accommodated in algae by genetic engineering.

I am encouraged that you are thinking of solutions. I take it that you are a young and idealistic person. If not I apologise and am encouraged at older idealists. The idea about algae that take in carbon dioxide and produce plastic monomers sounds good. With the clouds idea, what about the algae in the Oceans that take up and incorporate huge amounts of CO2?

I was amazed, even with a simple search, how much humanity can benefit from using algae. I urge you to do some extra reading because this is so exciting!

http://bioscience.oxfordjournals.org/content/60/9/722.full

http://allaboutalgae.com/benefits/

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1104772/Amazing-discovery-green-algae-save-world-global-warming.html

http://inhabitat.com/living-microalgae-lamp-absorbs-co2-from-the-air/pierre-calleja-inspects-a-prototype-street-lamp-in-his-laboratory-in-libourne/

no bites huh? I thought that the video was a fake but later found that it could be genuine in maintaining the head of canines. It seems to be the work of a pioneering Soviet scientist:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Brukhonenko

Just a quick point. I am not an anatomist or physiologist but I am very curious. Can the human brain be kept alive inside the cranium separate from the body, if it can be quickly connected to an external circulating source of oxygenated (and glucose-rich) blood and if the deoxygenated blood can be quickly removed? For example, IIRC, the carotid arteries can carry oxygenated blood to be removed by the jugular veins. If so, can emergency surgery be used to extend the life of brains?

I saw this video but I do not know if it is practical or not:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSrIkUXwsNk

It seems to be a two step process. With the products of the first reaction decomposing to make reduced copper.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_is_cuprous_iodide_prepared?#slide=1

What happened to your mother's cholesterol levels, and can this be replicated?

I remember hearing about organisms that are posited to be immortal. However, is this just a myth or are there organisms which can be considered immortal due to physical changes?

This would make sense to me. However, as a mechanism for how pulses affect cholesterol, is it a biochemical effect or is the fibre behaving as a physical barrier for consumed fats?

In response to the OP, I suspect that the authors know a reasonable amount about the biology of what they are saying. For example:

One experimental way to resolve the nucleus/cytoplasm issue is cross species nuclear transfer to enucleated eggs. This has not proved possible with mammals, but has been successful with fish. Enucleated goldfish eggs transplanted with nuclei from carp eggs develop with the outward appearance of the donor carp, but with a vertebral number (26 to 31) consistent with goldfish (26 to 28) rather than the genomic DNA donor carp (33 to 36). We assume that when two dynamic attractors are placed in a common environment, as in the case of the zygote, that they will “synchronize” as, for example, with Huygens’ clocks. Therefore, we argue that biology can explain inheritance on the basis of a sound foundation in the appropriate physics, without resorting to mechanistic narratives involving genes.

Furthermore, work in the 1970s demonstrated that enucleated HPRT-competent (HPRT is an enzyme whose absence causes the awful Lesch-Nyhan syndrome, an inborn error of metabolism-RL) fibroblasts in vitro could correct HPRT deficiency in fibroblasts with an intact nucleus, by transferring molecules via gap junctions, without the need for protein synthesis. In addition, erythrocytes (red blood cells) dispose of their nuclei at the last stage of differentiation, but retain, for example, the circadian rhythm function for their lifetime.

 

http://blogs.plos.org/dnascience/2014/03/20/challenge-supremacy-dna-genetic-material/

One of my close friends told me that he had a suspicion that his thoughts were being read and transmitted, years ago. At first I thought that he had flipped or undergone a mental breakdown. However, he assured me that his thoughts were being read and that these private thoughts were spoken aloud by strangers in public places. Still worried, I urged him to seek medical help. However, he is now in contact with a growing number of individuals who say exactly the same thing and seem to undergo exactly the same routines. In short, it is very similar to the tactics of the Secret Police in Eastern European countries. His suggestion to this thread is that synthetic telepathy is now old news and that he fears it will be rolled out against the world, as part of a multi-pronged attack to control populations, as we are gripped by the rise of Fascism.

Is this all crap? I have no idea but he did pass me to these sites for further info: http://www.stopos.info/os.pdf

http://www.google.com/patents/US3951134

He still seems credible after all these years...

Sorry, I could not read the article as a non-registered person. However, a useful homologous study found the following:

 

Allergic diseases are characterized by biphasic reactions mediated by IgE.18 The immediate reaction appears within minutes after exposure to an antigen, and the late-phase reaction may occur two to eight hours afterward. The latter process is the model for allergic disease.19,20 Lung biopsy21,22 and bronchoalveolar lavage23 in subjects with stable asthma show the presence of inflammation consistent with a late-phase reaction, whereas pulmonary-function tests show hyperresponsiveness of the airway that is proportional to the magnitude of the late-phase reaction.24IgE binds to high-affinity receptors on tissue mast cells and circulating basophils.10,25 In subjects with asthma, there is a correlation between serum IgE concentrations and both airway responsiveness26 and the number of high-affinity receptors.25

Effective allergen immunotherapy attenuates the late-phase reaction.27 However, immunotherapy as currently practiced has not been uniformly effective in the treatment of allergic disease.28,29Consequently, the basis of therapy remains the consistent use of antiinflammatory medication, most often in the form of inhaled corticosteroids, to block the late-phase reaction and reduce airway hyperresponsiveness.8,30 Successful antiinflammatory therapy leads to long-term prevention of the symptoms of asthma by suppressing, controlling, and reversing inflammation.8,30 The clinical efficacy of rhuMAb-E25 may be the result of similar effects on the pathogenesis of the allergic response.

Although immunotherapy is effective only in a narrow, antigen-specific range,9 rhuMAb-E25 removes IgE from the circulation, basophils,10 and mast cells regardless of its antigen specificity.31,32 In this study and in earlier work,5,6 a single dose of rhuMAb-E25 rapidly reduced serum free IgE serum concentrations by more than 95 percent. Although serum free IgE concentrations declined precipitously, mean serum total IgE concentrations, consisting mostly of immunoglobulin complexes, increased over time and appeared to reach a plateau.4 Analytic ultracentrifugation and size-exclusion chromatography identified the largest complexes of rhuMAb-E25 and IgE as heterohexamers with a molecular mass of 1,000,000 or less.33 Because these complexes cannot bind IgE receptors, they lack the biologic activity of IgE. The complexes are cleared by low-avidity interaction with the Fcγ receptors of leukocytes and the reticuloendothelial system.4 These low-molecular-weight complexes, which do not fix complement or accumulate in renal glomeruli, do not pose a risk of immunopathogenicity.4

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199912233412603#t=articleDiscussion

It appears that there is a combination therapy of anti IgE antibodies and anti-inflammatory drugs and that this combination has the effect of decreasing the allergic response. Other chemicals seem not to act on IgE connected to mast cells but down regulate the manufacture of IgE receptors.

I am a bit worried about the wide range of household products available which contain antibiotic. For example, at a rare visit to the supermarket, I noted that it was possible to obtain antibacterial toothpaste, washing up liquid, hand soap, washing powder, cream cleaners etc...

I wonder if this over-use of antibacterial chemicals will raise a huge population of bacteria resistant to antibiotics?

Has anyone tested for antibiotic resistance, and is there an environmental impact of which we are unaware - either in the human bacterial environment (gut, skin, nose, airways) or in the wider environment (household table tops, sewer water, waste water from homes)?

There is evidence that smoking can cause germ line DNA damage, which can then be inherited by the progeny.

 

http://cancerres.aac...1/5103.abstract

 

And another suggesting germ line damage due to air pollution.

 

http://www.pnas.org/content/105/2/605.full

These studies are both mouse based studies and the evidence is a concern. However, it would be interesting to see the same phenomenon across different genetic strains of mice. The second study included C57 black mice and also CBA mice. I wonder what influenced the authors to choose these particular genetic strains. Are they more resistant or less resistant to genetic stress? Why not use the ubiquitous BALB/c white mice?

Despite my doubts, if the findings can be applied to humans, these are pretty serious results. Does that mean that people in heavily populated cities are carrying germ line mutations which have affected their progeny for generations? I am worried!

That's exactly what I meant iNow. Thanks for the summary of my long-winded answer.

"What about considering studies that were suggesting a causation of smoking with cancer being squashed by influential scientists (funded by the smoking industry) as a mere correlation? "

Er, what's your point here?

The relationship between cancer and smoking has been found out in spite of vast sums of money from the tobacco industry trying to silence it.

Most countries now have fairly strict laws about where you can smoke.

 

" Council for Tobacco Research" are nicknamed "the flat earth society" for their refusal to accept the bleeding obvious. Nobody takes them seriously.

My point here was that scientific building of objective evidence and also causal relationships could easily be swept aside for political and economic expediency, even by fellow scientists. The work of scientists showing a direct causal relationship of cigarette components and cancer in laboratory animals was suppressed or minimised by commercial interests and, which is worse, by prominent scientists, who were in the pockets of the industry. I don't know how the cigarette industry was exposed but, if we believe Hollywood, it was Dr Wigand's appearance on 60 minutes which gave life to the causal relationship between cigarette smoking and its deleterious effects.

Wigand

Unfortunately for the tobacco industry, the results of these early studies were discouraging. As we discuss in the following chapters, by the 1960s BAT scientists had concluded that nicotine is addictive and company-sponsored laboratory tests showed that components of tobacco smoke cause cancer in animals. The company responded to these findings at first by attempting to create a "safe" cigarette, although it publicly maintained that cigarettes had not been proven dangerous to health. When the scientists had concluded that they would not be able to create a "safe" cigarette, the company retreated behind a stone wall of denial, where it remains to this day.

 

The Council For Tobacco Research

The same memo {2205.01} that discussed the "tar derby" also discussed another public relations strategy adopted by the tobacco industry during the 1950sthe sponsorship of supposedly independent scientific research. (The memo, written in 1976 by Ernest Pepples, describes the industry's response to the "cigarette/health controversy" over time. As stated above, other aspects of this memo are discussed in detail in chapter 7.) This strategy allowed the tobacco industry to claim that there was a "controversy" over the effects of smoking and that more research was needed to resolve the debate.

 

Pepples notes that, besides producing filter and low-tar cigarettes, the industry reacted to the evidence linking its products to various diseases by supporting scientific research. The purpose of this research was "to refute unfavorable findings or at a minimum to keep the scientific question open" {2205.01, p. 1}. In addition, Pepples states:

 

The significant expenditures on the question of smoking and health have allowed the industry to take a respectable stand along the following linesAfter millions of dollars and over twenty years of research, the question about smoking and health is still open" [emphasis added]. {2205.01, p. 12}

 

The Tobacco Industry Research Committee (TIRC), formed jointly by US tobacco companies in 1954, was the primary institution that helped the industry promote this message. (TIRC was renamed the Council for Tobacco Research-U.S.A. [CTR] in 1964. We will therefore refer to this organization as TIRC when discussing periods from 1954 to 1964 and as CTR when discussing periods after 1964.) By 1985 CTR's annual budget reached $11,278,000.

 

 

The industry stated publicly that it was forming TIRC in response to scientific reports suggesting a link between smoking and lung cancer, and that the purpose of TIRC was to fund independent scientific research to determine whether these reports were true. However, the documents show that TIRC was actually formed for public relations purposes, to convince the public that the hazards of smoking had not been definitively proven.

 

Link

Furthermore, I can also mention Semmelweiss, who made a connection between childbed fever and lack of hand washing. His findings conflicted with the consensus and were ignored until after his death:

Semmelweis discovered that the incidence of puerperal fever could be drastically cut by the use of hand disinfection in obstetrical clinics.[1] Puerperal fever was common in mid-19th-century hospitals and often fatal, with mortality at 10%35%. Semmelweis postulated the theory of washing with chlorinated lime solutions in 1847[1] while working in Vienna General Hospital's First Obstetrical Clinic, where doctors' wards had three times the mortality of midwives' wards. He published a book of his findings in Etiology, Concept and Prophylaxis of Childbed Fever.

 

Despite various publications of results where hand-washing reduced mortality to below 1%, Semmelweis's observations conflicted with the established scientific and medical opinions of the time and his ideas were rejected by the medical community. Some doctors were offended at the suggestion that they should wash their hands and Semmelweis could offer no acceptable scientific explanation for his findings. Semmelweis's practice earned widespread acceptance only years after his death, when Louis Pasteur confirmed the germ theory and Joseph Lister practised and operated, using hygienic methods, with great success. In 1865, Semmelweis was committed to an asylum, where he died, ironically, of septicemia at age 47.

 

Wiki

Nice links dimreepr. Need to read through them now. Will get back to you.

I read through both links with interest, although I just quickly scanned the wiki article because it was quite lengthy.

From what I can tell, there are specific factors which affect climate. Add to these for clarification guys:

1) Latitude (as it increases, temperature decreases);

2) Large bodies of water (can affect overall temperatures of land nearby);

3) Windward (wet) or leeward (drier) parts of a slope;

4) Elevation ( higher means colder);

5) Ocean Currents, e.g. the thermohaline circulation you referred to above which bring warmth to the Northern Atlantic Ocean.

The combinations lead to differences in temperature from region to region of the same country, as well as between countries. Therefore, the OP was just speculation and is not backed up with evidence.

I'm afraid that my response to the proposition that the scientific truth will eventually be found out is a cynical and tired comment: 'Bollocks!' In the real world, being in the right cliques, ass kissing and following the latest trend by the latest 'great man' of science seem to matter more in a grant application than someone who has an alternative theory for the same phenomenon. At least this was my experience as a research scientist...

What about considering studies that were suggesting a causation of smoking with cancer being squashed by influential scientists (funded by the smoking industry) as a mere correlation? The hypothetico deductive method seems to be littered with the bodies of the insouciant and unwitting.

Little began his work with mice, focused on inheritance, transplants, and grafts. He also was an assistant dean and secretary to the president. His most important research occurred at Harvard, including what some call his most brilliant work, "A Mendelian explanation for the inheritance of a trait that has apparently non-Mendelian characteristics"....

 

His last major post, from 1954 to 1969, was as the Scientific Director of the Scientific Advisory Board of the Tobacco Industry Research Committee (renamed Council for Tobacco Research in 1964). In that role he was a leading scientific voice of the tobacco industry and oversaw a USD 1 million research budget that gave grants to hundreds of scientists. [1][2] In 1959 he refuted his earlier assertion, made as Director of the ACS, that inhaling fine particles is unhealthy, and stated that smoking does not cause lung cancer and is at most a minor contributing factor. [3]. A decade later he said, "there is no demonstrated causal relationship between smoking or any disease."[4] In keeping with his earlier research he believed that the main cause of cancer was genetic, not environmental.

Link

Australia has the Tropic of Capricorn and 30º latitude lines running through it, making its location the equivalent of Northern Africa, not Europe. New Zealand is well north of the Antarctic circle around 45º so comparing it to Sweden/Norway (or even Scotland) is not a fair comparison. New Guinea is entirely tropical, almost touching the equator. Southern Europe doesn't extend past 30º it's closer to 40º.

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/world_maps/world_pol495.jpg

 

In short, your north vs south comparisons are off.

Very interesting. Yes, I can see that I made unfair comparisons for the countries that I chose. So it was only a perception then! What about the hemispheres by themselves? I should choose different countries at the same latitude from the equator to make a reasonably fair comparison.

What about Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Ukraine and France compared to Southern Argentina, Southern Autralia and New Zealand? Would that be an acceptable comparison about North and South?

The truth of the matter is the opposite; the northern hemisphere Temperature exceeds the southern by an average of approximately 2 degrees C.

 

http://itg1.meteor.wisc.edu/wxwise/AckermanKnox/chap14/climate_spatial_scales.html

I see that the reports talked about average temperatures over both hemispheres at a large scale which misses out climatic differences in a single country and that is OK. However, it is a surprising result for me because I would not have expected people to flock to Northern hemispheres from the likes of Africa for warm holidays but it tends to be the case for people in Britain to go south when they want warmer climes. I suppose I am being excessively insular.

http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/temp/jonescru/graphics/glnhsh.png