jimmydasaint

If that is the work I am thinking of, there is a definite good reason for this research, and I am not talking about bioterror or something like that.

What they did is introducing alleles in H5N1, which already exist in nature, just not yet combined in a single strain. The goal was to find out, how many changes are required to result in a strain that can be transmitted between humans. There are two reasons why this is important. First, to evaluate the likelihood of that occurring in nature. Remember the first outbreak, when people claimed that the warnings of this strain were overrated because it was not transmissible between humans (and thus declared it alarmism)?

Well, this study provides how many allele exchanges are necessary. I think they have not yet published, due to ethical reasons, but they mentioned that it was only five or so. Thus, I would think that this work is important as it shows that a limited number of recombinations can result in this precise strain in nature.

CharonY, I cannot think of any good reason to make a more dangerous form of the influenza virus. Perhaps the researchers can identify the mutations involved in increasing infectivity in aerosolised form, but then where does the research go next? IIRC, orthomyxoviruses have segmented genomes and are capable of recombination of genomic segments (correct me if I am wrong here). Mutations are bound to arise in the serotype anyway.

The second important bit is closely related to the first is what CaptainPanic mentioned. If it is only a matter of time that the virus may pop up, isn't it better to develop a vaccine beforehand? And for that, this strain is also needed.

 

Will the vaccine work? Well, the question here is whether further mutated strain are A) still able to transmit between humans and B) be more virulent. And again, to analyze that one has to know what actually are the factors leading to transmission.

 

To be honest, I was pretty much on the fence, too, when the information started to pop up. However, in the end I think the likelihood of the recombinations/mutations are going to happen anyway that I prefer proper research before it really hits.

I would have thought that resistant 'strains' of the influenza virus would arise within a short time of circulating a vaccine. I am not up to date with the data on HIV, but is there a successful vaccine now available?

With more people on this planet than ever, can we say that diseases can also mutate quicker , because they basically have more feeding grounds - more humans - around?

 

Would there be a reason to assume that the amount of diseases that evolve are a linear function of the amount of people (limited only by our health and healthcare, which kills off a lot before it spreads).

 

If not, is there any other way to estimate the likelihood that a serious disease will evolve within X years?

Excellent question Captain but I will let CharonY answer it, because I do not have the knowledge of the biostatistics field. However, a quick glance at a paper seems to suggest high mutation rates for RNA viruses.

The rate of spontaneous mutation is a key parameter in modeling the genetic structure and evolution of populations. The impact of the accumulated load of mutations and the consequences of increasing the mutation rate are important in assessing the genetic health of populations. Mutation frequencies are among the more directly measurable population parameters, although the information needed to convert them into mutation rates is often lacking. A previous analysis of mutation rates in RNA viruses (specifically in riboviruses rather than retroviruses) was constrained by the quality and quantity of available measurements and by the lack of a specific theoretical framework for converting mutation frequencies into mutation rates in this group of organisms. Here, we describe a simple relation between ribovirus mutation frequencies and mutation rates, apply it to the best (albeit far from satisfactory) available data, and observe a central value for the mutation rate per genome per replication of μg ≈ 0.76. (The rate per round of cell infection is twice this value or about 1.5.) This value is so large, and ribovirus genomes are so informationally dense, that even a modest increase extinguishes the population

Link to Paper

According to the article, the point is to study how to fight an airborne version of the H5N1 strain.

For that, you first have to create it.

 

But I agree that it's pretty damn dangerous and it might be better to do this study at a very different location (not a university), even though the virus is kept behind locked doors, guarded by armed guards..

 

At the same time, it's only a matter of time before another disease spreads...

With respect, I don't think there is any clear justification for the introduction of a highly virulent strain of a virus that can cause pandemics, after potentiation by passing through animals and selection. What is the point in creating a vaccine when we already know there will be resistant strains created by Natural Selection? IMHO, this is one of the reasons that vaccines against HIV have been partly successful.

I found this blog which tempers the news slightly - http://www.virology....influenza-h5n1/

 

As usual some of the press reports are OTT - and it seems some of the scientists quotes are a little hot-headed as well

Although I am aware of the attenuation of viral pathogenicity in other species, and even in the same species, the justification of creating a vaccine is highly contentious, given the viral proclivity to mutate.

The fear is that if you create something this deadly and it goes into a global pandemic, the mortality and cost to the world could be massive," a senior scientific adviser to the US Government told The Independent, speaking on condition of anonymity.

 

"The worst-case scenario here is worse than anything you can imagine."

 

For the first time the researchers have been able to mutate the H5N1 strain of avian influenza so that it can be transmitted easily through the air in coughs and sneezes. Until now, it was thought that H5N1 bird flu could only be transmitted between humans via very close physical contact.

The Independent UK

(emphasis is my own - jimmy)

Some may ask: 'What is the bloody point?'

At the end of October 2011, I had a very vivid dream. I was driving along a motorway in my car when, all of a sudden, there was thick black smoke all across the motorway. I had to make a quick decision what to do and I decided to speed up to get clear of the smoke. I could not see anything at all in front of me. Suddenly, I saw a car in front of me and I could not stop in time. As the collision occurred I woke up. About a week and a half later this happened:

Jaysen Sharp, who witnessed the incident from a nearby rugby club, said: “It was a horrific accident. There were a number of explosions and black smoke. It’s not something you expect to see on the motorway, it was more like a scene from Afghanistan.”

 

The accident occurred at 8.25pm on Friday after a bank of fog or smoke 200 yards thick enveloped a section of the M5 between junctions 24 and 25, close to Taunton.

 

The pile-up appeared to have begun when an Iceland lorry entered a fog which one motorist said was “like emulsion

M5 Motorway Crash

Which field of science could answer the reasons behind this occurence? Is it simple coincidence? Because if it is, then my wife and one of my children dreamed about the death of my mother (when she was in good health) about 6 months before she passed on. Was this also a coincidence?

I don't honestly know the answer to this. But is it possible that we are capable of tapping into a collective consciousness at some point?

Thanks for the replies guys. The track and guidelines are electromagnetic and do consume energy. However, as it is for a short time, as others have stated, and does not experience the friction of moving on wheels, so it is a potential energy saver.

The big difference between a maglev train and a conventional train is that maglev trains do not have an engine -- at least not the kind of engine used to pull typical train cars along steel tracks. The engine for maglev trains is rather inconspicuous. Instead of using fossil fuels, the magnetic field created by the electrified coils in the guideway walls and the track combine to propel the train.

How Stuff Works

http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/maglev-track1.gif

Unfortunately, as has been mentioned, by swansont and others, that the costs of setting up this technology are dollar-intensive when a second recession is looming.

3. California High-Speed Rail

Top Speed /// 220 mph | Distance /// 800 miles

Technology /// high-speed steel wheel

 

The Plan /// More than a dozen years in the planning, the next best chance to build the first high-speed rail system in the U.S. is California's high-speed rail initiative. California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has put his political muscle behind it by agreeing to put the issue to the voters on the November ballot as Proposition 1A. Voters will decide whether the state will put up $9.95 billion for the project--its obligation for the construction of the line from Los Angeles to San Francisco (federal and other public funds would make up the balance).

 

When completed, the trip would take about 2.5 hours, rivaling the time it takes to fly between the two cities. Ultimately, the California High-Speed Rail Authority would like to link all major cities in California. According to state government estimates, it's a superior alternative to expanding airports and constructing 3000 miles of highway that it believes will be needed in the near future at a cost of $82 billion.

 

Estimated Cost /// $40 billion | Estimated Completion Date /// 2030 (for all 800 miles)

 

Read more: 5 New Super Trains on Fast Track to World's Fastest Bullet - Popular Mechanics

Popular Mechanics

CONCLUSIONS

 

Compared to 300 mph (483 km/hr) maglev trains, a 300 mph, 0.2 atm (20 kPa) PRT Maglev would require approximately 56% of the infrastructure cost at $10 million per mile as compared to $17.9 million per mile of bi-directional guideway. The energy requirements of the 300 mph Maglev would be approximately 45% of that corresponding to a train system. Such a 300 mph, 0.2 atm PRT Maglev would operate at low pressures typically encountered by commercial aircraft and no new developments or breakthroughs would be needed for maintaining cabin pressure.

 

A similar PRT Maglev system at 500 mph (805 km/hr) would offer a 25% reduction in travel time due to higher velocities and even further time reductions due to PRT service. However, a 500 mph, 0.2 atm PRT Maglev would consume a similar amount of energy as the 300 mph Bechtel concept and would have similar system costs. On option for alleviating the higher costs at 500 mph is to reduce internal tube pressures to between 0.03 atm and 0.1 atm (3-10 kPa). Both increasing velocities to 500 mph and decreasing pressures to 0.05 atm could be performed as evolutions to an initial system operated at 300 mph and 0.2 atm.

Academic Study

From a very prelliminary scan of the paper, it mentions Type I as including inflammatory responses to graft rejection, autoimmune reactions (also known as Type II and III hypersensitivity) and also seems to include normal Tcell-B cell interactions to antigen presentation, so the definition must have broadened since the 'old days':

More generally, the broad range of type 1 immune responses such as infectious diseases (intra and extracellular pathogens) or autoimmunity (diabetes, multiple sclerosis and lupus) that involve or require IFN-γ suggest a role for Pin1 in these processes as well.

 

Plos Link

Also found this ks:

Hypersensitivity (also called hypersensitivity reaction) refers to undesirable reactions produced by the normal immune system, including allergies and autoimmunity. These reactions may be damaging, uncomfortable, or occasionally fatal. Hypersensitivity reactions require a pre-sensitized (immune) state of the host. The four-group classification was expounded by P. H. G. Gell and Robin Coombs in 1963.[1]

 

Wiki

IIRC there are hypersensitivity disorders given the numbers I to IV, with I being common allergic responses, e.g. asthma, whilst Type IV represented delayed type hypersensitivity to antigens. Maybe if you use these as search strings it may relate to what you are looking for.

Hang on, I thought the % method referred to weight per volume, e.g. 5% of agarose would represent 5 g dissolved in, and made up to 100 ml. I don't think I need to say more because this is homework help.

IMHO, the Maglev train using computers to guide a train by the principles of repulsion and attraction is a superb example of modern engineering overcoming a problem. The problem is to move populations around as quickly safely, and without hassle to different conurbations, either within a country or internationally.

The priciples are demonstrated below:

and

How Maglev trains work

However, it strikes me, as a member of the energy consuming public, that this seems to use a lot of electricity and raw materials. Of more concern to me is how much energy the trains will drain from the National Grid, and how this compares to the amount of fossil fuels used by aeroplanes.

Is a maglev another energy consuming idea that will force us to burn more fossil fuels to generate electricity for it, or can it become an elegant and intelligent solution to future travel?

It certainly looks that way. Has this topic been controversial because one looks like a strain of the other? Additionally, are the proteins significantly different, because each yeast would display proteins on their surface, which could be recognised by antibodies?

Whilst I am not trying to over simplify the multiplicity of causes that can contribute to coronary heart disease, I wonder if prevention is better than a cure. For example, if people at risk took regularly high levels of S methyl cysteine that is found in garlic and turmeric, could they avoid the deleterious effects of high blood cholesterol levels and the increased risk of atheroma, aneurysm or thrombosis?

Link

For example, this article suggests that a synergistic effect of S methyl cysteine and another chemical can cause a measurable effect in reducing cholesterol in patients:

Synergistic Effect of Curcuminoid and S-methyl Cysteine in Regulation of Cholesterol Homeostasis

 

P. Hasimun, E.Y. Sukandar, I.K. Adnyana and D.H. Tjahjono

 

Abstract: Turmeric and garlic have been known to lower cholesterol levels in hyperlipidemic state. Thus, both can be used as an alternative hyperlipidemia therapy to prevent complications of cardiovascular diseases. However, the mechanism of actions of both in lowering cholesterol are still unclear. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of curcuminoid, S-methyl cysteine and its combination in regulation of cholesterol levels in serum, liver and feces. This study used an animal model of rats with cholesterol metabolism abnormality induced by propylthiouracyl for 7 days. Curcuminoid, S-methyl cysteine and its combination were given on day 8, 1 h before the induction of cholesterol solution. Total cholesterol level in serum, liver and feces were measured during 6 h of observation. The results showed that the curcuminoid, S-methyl cysteine and its combination maintained the serum cholesterol within the normal level by inhibiting cholesterol absorption and lowering cholesterol level in liver. Curcuminoid and its combination with S-methyl cysteine increased the conversion of cholesterol into the feces as much as 3 times higher than the control group. While the S-methyl cysteine alone did not increase the conversion of cholesterol into the feces. We concluded that curcuminoid and S-methyl cysteine have multiple site of actions in lowering cholesterol level in the body. Both also work synergistically to overcome hyperlipidemia.

Link to Abstract

However, how many people even realised that consuming S-methyl cysteine was a preventative method?

Ant comments?

Yes. In my example,only slightly related to yours,

12 ml 20% acrylamide/ 0.8% bisacrylamide

12.5 ml 4X Tris buffer

25.5 ml H2O

10 ul 2% bromophenol

Then, 20% acrylamide + 0.8 bisacrylamide = approximately 20.8 g/100 ml solvent

= 0.208 g of acrylamide:bisacrylamide per ml.

I have 12 ml, therefore I have 12 x 0.208 g total amount of acrylamide/bisacrylamide = 2.496 g

Then this amount is spread over 12 + 12.5 + 25.5 ml in total = 50 ml

So there are 2.496 g per 50 ml and therefore 4.992 g/ 100 ml, making it an approximately 5% SDS/PAGE gel which I assume you need to separate out high molecular weight macromolecules? If not, I have messed something up in the calculations.

I hope I am Ok in doing these calculations so I will prepare an exemplar. Others can correct me if my method needs correction. Mods, if I am too detailed in my advice, then I apologise in advance. Let's imagine that you have:

12 ml 20% acrylamide/ 0.8% bisacrylamide

12.5 ml 4X Tris buffer

25.5 ml H2O

10 ul 2% bromophenol

Then, 20% acrylamide + 0.8 bisacrylamide = approximately 20.8 g/100 ml solvent

= 0.208 g of acrylamide:bisacrylamide per ml.

I have 12 ml, therefore I have 12 x 0.208 g total amount of acrylamide/bisacrylamide.

Then this amount is spread over 12 + 12.5 + 25.5 ml in total. Therefore you can now convert the total number of grams acrylamide:bisacrylamide in 100 ml of solvent. (bromophenol blue is negligible in these calculations). Does that make sense?

I am not sure how much I can help. However, the concentration of acrylamide and bisacylamide are given as a ratio of mass to volume. For example, if I had 10% acrylamide then it means that 10 grams of acrylamide have been dissolved in 100ml of a solvent. If I have 8 ml of this acrylamide, can you now guess how much it contains? And if I now add suitable buffers to a new volume, I can then recalulate how much acrylamide and bisacrylamide there is in the final solution as grams per 100 ml of the new solution. I hope this makes sense.

I am merely an interested observer and not a knowledgeable person on the possible effects of global warming on the Thermohaline Circulation where heat is brought to Northern Europe. I have wondered if a disturbance of the THC (called AMOC in the following article) would lead to temperature differences in Northern Europe. The worst case scenario in a collapse could mean temperature drops of up to 9 Centigrade.

Any comments or information from the better read on this topic?

Motivation:

The Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC), often referred to as the thermohaline circulation, plays a pivotal role in the global climate system. (See the section below for a basic description of the AMOC.) The AMOC transports heat northwards in the Atlantic via the Gulf Stream and North Atlantic Current, making European climate significantly warmer than it would otherwise be. Evidence from palaeoclimate records suggests that this circulation has changed dramatically in the past (e.g., Clark et al, 2002), and there is concern that it could be disrupted in the future. As concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases increase and the climate warms, it is expected that there will be increased precipitation in mid-latitudes and less formation of sea ice (Meehl et al, 2007). This would make the surface ocean less salty, which (along with the warming) makes the surface waters less dense, and less likely to sink, meaning that the AMOC would weaken or maybe collapse completely. Previous experiments have shown that if the AMOC were to collapse, the impacts would be felt across the globe, and most severely in the North Atlantic region (see below).

Link

and also this downloaded article:

Link to Article

I though the whole point of a Science Forum was to encourage, educate and enthuse ALL ages and ALL educational levels to understand the world around us and to turn out well informed members of the public who can appreciate the advances and sheer amazing nature of scientific discovery and the scientific method....

Yet the sneering tones and responses to a good simple question, by some of the contributors above, dismay me. That is not why I come to this Forum. If you want to show sarcasm and arrogance instead of a genuine wish to answer questions by doing some research first, then I am afraid you are revealing your own insecurities.

This is OUR Forum, for the people who love their Science and are probably aged from 11 upwards. It is OUR right to ask simple questions because that is part of the mission statement of Science education. It is not the right of people to show arrogance to those of less knowledge.

Thank you for the contribution super ball. You have certainly hyper cross contextualised your information, which is an intelligent thing to do. However, correlation and causation are difficult to tell apart and I feel that you may also need more direct information about the increase in asthma. An evidential approach is necessary and can, IMHO, come from datamining information from a number of countries where the data is collected and then trends identified in a meta-analytical study.

In short, the original article I cited, presented some of the following as possible reasons for exacerbating allergic symptoms in atopic (predisposed) individuals

and suggested preventative measures:

Primary prevention

Avoid smoking and exposure to environmental tobacco

smoke, particularly during pregnancy and early childhood

(B). Tobacco smoke should be also removed from work

places (B)

Avoid damp housing conditions ©, and reduce indoor air

pollutants ©

Breastfeed exclusively until 46 months (B)*. No special

diet for the lactating mother (A)

Reduce exposure to inhalant allergens in young children at

high risk (dust mites, cockroaches, furred pets) (B)

Eliminate sensitizing and highly irritating agents in occupational

environments ©. If this is not possible, implement

measures to prevent employee exposure

Link to OP Article

At the same time sb, we also have to consider:

a) age of the subject,

b) health of the subject

c) type of environmental pollutant

d) concentration of environmental pollutant

e) type of activity performed by the subject at time of onset of symptoms.

Looking for a causation would include looking at the big picture and you have posited some very interesting scenarios concerning environmental changes, including increases in ground level ozone, presence of methane and natural gas. These are interesting examples of lateral and intelligent thinking but I would prefer a meta-analytical approach given the complexities of the variables above. Peace.

Look over my answer to your post before you get desperate. Try to look up dihybrid cross animations.

Rather than answering the question, please look over the following animation and all will become clear:

Dihybrid cross

Thank you for the lucid and erudite explanation iNow. I also wondered about the brain mechanisms that occur when tears of sadness/frustration/anger/empathy are shed.

I was asked this question and could not answer it, to any real extent. Why do emotions lead to the crying response or to tears in the eyes? Are these responses the same in babies and adults? Which part of the brain is responsible?

Partial answers and reference to papers welcomed.

I wonder if this is what you are getting at:

Inorganic polyphosphate (poly P) is a polymer made from as few as 10 to several hundred phosphate molecules linked by phosphoanhydride bonds similar to ATP. Poly P is ubiquitous in all mammalian organisms, where it plays multiple physiological roles.

polyphosphates

If you are looking for this prokaryote energy source, then there is also a relevant oldie but goldie paper here: Polyphosphate paper

If you do not understand parts of it, give a reply and we can help a little more. Good luck.

Cap'n, I know you are into Science education, as am I. However, do you favour the establishment of specialist Science colleges for students who love the subject and can spend all day studying it, or do you think we can turn out educated, critical thinking future members of the public from our current educational systems in the US and the UK?

Why are a majority of plant leaves green, when they would absorb more of the sunlight's energy if they were black, thus absorbing all of the light spectrum and giving the plant more energy?

Surely for this reason and through Darwin's theory of natural selection, plants would all be black as they would grow better and grow in places with less light and consequently prevailing all the other species of plant?

Thanks

Great question Maundy. I think you got the black leaves thing from Lovelock and Watson's hypothetical 'Daisyworld'.

Daisyworld I wonder if it is possible that aquatic plants had chlorophyll and then, as some moved on to the land, the colour green was preserved in the chlorophyll? Long wavelengths (blue light etc...) are better asorbed in the water at reasonable depths, e.g. 1.0 m, at which about 45% of the available light will get through. How Light Penetrates Water

It may be possible that this colour did not require further random selection.

I hope this is not homework you naughty, naughty boy!

Commensialism means literally 'at table together'. This is a symbiotic relationship between two species in which one species benefits and the other neither benefits or harms. Often, the host species provides a home and/or transportation for the other species.

 

 

Examples:

 

 

clownfishes live within the waving mass of tentacles of sea anemones; Because most fishes aviod the poisonous tentacles, the clownfishes are protected from predators. Perhaps this relationship borders on mutualism because the clownfishes actually may attract other fishes on which the anemone can feed. The sea anemone's tentacles quickly paralyze and seize other fishes as prey;

 

 

Link