Jump to content

Endy0816

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    3210
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Endy0816

  1.  

    Tumour cells tend to shut down mitochondria, the sites of oxidative phosphorylation and the intrinsic pathway of apoptosis. The former is beneficial for the transformed cell because, typically, the cells in the interior of a tumour will be experiencing conditions of hypoxia (even if the tumour cells have induced an angiogenic response, the resulting blood-vessels tend to be rudimentary, leaky and disorganised with many dead-ends) and so it is preferable for them to rely on Oxygen*-independent substrate level glycolysis as a means of generating ATP (even if the energy yield is less than the output of the citric acid cycle and oxidative phosphorylation). The pyruvate generated from glycolysis is often shunted into the lactate dehydrogenase-catalysed production of lactate, rather than into the pyruvate dehydrogenase-catalysed production of acetyl CoA for entry into the citric acid cycle. The lactate is then extruded by transformed cells to be taken up and used by respiring stromal or tumour cells, thereby saving glucose for use by hypoxic tumour cells. The latter is, of course, beneficial as it allows tumour cells to survive even in the presence of signals that would ordinarily seal their demise.

     

    It has also been suggested that the use of a ketogenic (low carbohydrate, high fat - medium chain triglyceride) diet may be beneficial for cancer patients, since the diet relies on the consumption of food that does not increase plasma glucose levels, but produces ketone bodies (D-3-hydroxybutyrate, acetoacetate and acetone) that can be used as a Carbon* source for energy production. These bypass glycolysis and are metabolised by mitochondria in the presence of Oxygen*. Normal cells can adapt to using ketone bodies to produce ATP but tumour cells rely on high glycolytic flux and so would not be expectedto survive on this alternative fuel source. Some in vivo and clinical studies have reported decreased tumour growth - even in cachexic patients, however a different study has reported negative results.

     

     

    *Out of a mark of respect for the chemical elements, I like to capitalise the first letter of their names, have done so since I was 11 and not about to stop now. I hope that this is not too disconcerting for readers.

     

     

    Makes sense. Hadn't looked at them from that angle before though.

     

    Mainly concerned about them leading to the death of healthy cells under low oxygen conditions. Would save a number of lives if we could alter their code. Just need to be free to do so without concern for causing cancer ourselves or giving cancer an edge.

  2. Probably the group size is relatively small.

     

    Knowledge/Acceptance of one's own death and possessing information they feel is necessary to share.

     

    On a number of occasions death bed confessions are met with skepticism. Either being seen as senile ramblings or attention seeking.

     

     

     

     

    The word secret has a lot of different meanings to it and knOWLedge can never be destroyed,therefor,it seems that it's always fear added with a little bit of knowledge mixed with confusion "can cause the animal to be put down."

     

    If a person earned/gained his own Knowledge,what would that person have to fear?

     

    The Bene Gesserit 'Litany Against Fear'

    I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.

     

     

     

    Reprisal,against friends,and family. Not uncommon,to this day...

  3. The parties have changed since then. Almost the opposite today with the democrats being seen as more supportive of minority rights.

     

    Your own attitude is prejudicial. Can't hold anyone or anything responsible for the past indefinitely. If people can change then so can the groups composed of them.

  4. We mainly just need a steady state for societal integrity reasons. I don't think anyone can deny that humanity hasn't had some kind of impact on the environment. The planet is pretty adaptable, human societies are not. More than a few have vanished due purely to environmental reasons.

     

    Much of what nature throws at us isn't preventable. In contrast controlling emissions is relatively easy.

     

     

    Generally we don't lose research once it is completed. Not like a number of the more transient boondoggles out there. In a number of areas we actually have greater efficiencies as a result. Waste to Resource, along with processing improvements.

     

    Getting late local time, take my random thoughts as you will.

  5. Genetic code is the basis of life. One of the seven criteria which scientists currently define life. Without genetic material a species could not exist. There would be no way for it to pass any traits on to off spring. Even viruses (which are the closest things to living that actually aren't) have genetic code. Bacteria have genetic code. I don't see genes as ever being "irrelevant". And your genes are the same regardless of what cell at which you are looking. The only reason we have blood/nerve/skin/etc cells is because those individual cells that make up the tissue are expressing different portions of the genetic code, but your DNA is always the same. So therefore, your brain isn't capable of altering your genes.

     

     

    Genetic Engineering is the obvious counterexample. Either of yourself or your offspring.

     

     

    Everyday technology is even more powerful though, quietly working to remove one selective pressure at a time. In some finite time it will remove them all, at the end probably migrating from genetic coding altogether.

     

     

    My guess would be homo transcendentalis, would consider themselves as evolving in terms of what their society, technology, and personal feelings dictate. Impossible to know for sure, but they will probably consider themselves as alive as we do.

  6. You really need to report it to a supervisor. Your lab or facility should have some kind of procedures in place.

     

    Without knowing the different variables there is no way to determine your risk.

     

     

    Pathogenicity: Hazards depend on multiple factors: whether the vector is capable of infecting human cells, whether the vector is replication competent, how many viral genes are contained in the vector, and the specific transgenes present in the vector. On an emergent basis, the PI should be the best source of information regarding potential health hazards.

    Modes of Transmission: Virus may be transmitted in the following ways: 1) a skin puncture or injection, 2) ingestion, 3) contact with mucous membranes (eyes, nose, or mouth), 4) contact with non-intact skin, and 5) low risk exposures include bites from an animal inoculated with lentivirus, percutaneous contact with body fluids from an animal inoculated with lentivirus and aerosols.

    Incubation Period: Variable, may be months to years

    Communicability: Replication incompetent vectors: Not communicable.

  7. Cancer is more the end result of a number of mutations occurring within your own cells.

     

    To some degree each cancer type and even individual cells are different. If even one is missed or has evolved some means of evading the cancer can start up again.

     

    We've only just started finding focused techniques to attack cancer. Previously it was all broad methods that killed as many good cells as bad, and were not 100% effective at removing all traces of the malfunctioning cells.

     

    HIV/AIDS is somewhat similar, though in this case a virus is hijacking one of our own immune responses to spread.

     

    Anything that can react via evolution is going to be a long uphill battle for human medicine techniques.

  8. Yeah, a new resource management game could be good. Otherwise adapting an existing concept to fit could also work well.

     

     

    3rd World Farmer and Sim Farm is a good example of this. Both games are farming simulations but with very different focuses. A number of casual games out there that could serve well as raw material.

     

     

    Best suggestion I have is to identify one specific issue that your group feels strongly about and proceed from there. Something motivating, "Save the Reefs!", "Stop the Polluters!", can serve as your rallying point. Then you can determine the game concept, necessary code and images.

  9. It reminds of a neural net re-weighting itself.

     

    The day's events strengthening some nodes while the random firings cause a more generalized weakening.

     

     

    I do wonder if modern tech would allow us to mess with it while a dream is ongoing. I'd like to try artificial muscle stimulation. Proprioception might provide a back door in.

  10. It has rattled around in my mind at least, probably others.

     

    The Universe appearing as a point at a higher level.

     

    Main issue is how you could ever prove or disprove such a state.

     

    Big assumption but if physics work the same then the Universe would have to deal with the addition of matter and eventual decay. This could be considered evidence against the theory.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.