No longer a cancer/youth tradeoff

This paper recently rolled off the presses touting p53 - that notable universal tumor suppressor gene that must be neutralized for cancer to proceed - actually has not only its usual cancer-resistance abilities, but potentially have youth-preserving ability when paired with a stabilizing protein, Arf.

This is pretty much counterintuitive to conventional wisdom; It's generally been accepted that getting old is a controlled mechanism to fight off the perpetual tumor generation going on in all of our bodies (you and I are likely killing a dozen or so tumor sites every day). In essence, you trade off maintaining your youthful looks and facility in order to live a long time. Not so, says this new paper!

Now, the sample sizes of some of the groups, especially in the somewhat dubious biomarker and biochemical studies seem quite small, and the fact they had to stoop to using a p value of 0.1 makes me veeeery leery. Still, I know keeping a dumb mouse alive for two years is no small feat, and direct comparisons are probably the only way to go here, so the t test suffers from the unpaired choices. Perhaps more worrying is their handwaving to dismiss the effect of the Ink genes, also known to have cancer-resistance properties. They seem to pull a 'Look over there!' moment towards the end of the paper.

All that said, there's some reasonable physiological evidence to make a story here, just probably not enough to topple the current hypothesis.

Finally, while this gene model keeps the mice youthful, still crossing that tightrope as if they were a spring whelp, it did not increase their life span. But ah, to die young after living a full life - doesn't seem so bad, eh?

The Fat of the Land

Angier weighs in on fat's defense.

This is an excellent example of a mechanism that got me interested in physiology in the first place. Fat should not be reviled, it is the amazing energy warehouse of the body, able to store more reserves that would otherwise tear our vital organs apart in a metabolic storm of fury.

Indeed, evolutionary biologists have proposed that our relative plumpness compared with our closest nonhuman kin, the chimpanzee, may help explain our relative braininess. Even a lean male athlete with a body fat content of 8 percent to 10 percent of total body mass (half the fat found on the average nonobese, non-Olympic American man) is still a few percentage points more marbled than a wild male chimpanzee, and scientists have suggested that our distinctive adipose stores help ensure that our big brains will be fed even when our cupboards go bare.

Too true. The brain is essentially a Ziploc bag full of fat and water, the additional white fatty matter affords male brains their excellent coordination. Fatheadedness is perhaps not such a terrible insult.

Fat also seems to know when it is getting out of hand, and it may resist new personal growth. Dr. Spiegelman and others have shown that with the onset of obesity — defined as 25 or more pounds above one’s ideal weight — the fat tissue starts releasing potent inflammatory hormones. That response is complex and harmful in the long run. But in the short term, said Dr. Spiegelman, “inflammation clearly has an anti-obesity effect, and it may be the body’s attempt to restrain further accumulation of adipose tissue.” The fat sizes up the risks and benefits, and it takes its fat chance.

Huh! If that's the case, it makes you wonder what effect the prolific amount of anti-inflammatory products we have on the market puts upon those bodies attempting to reign in their fattening bodies. Could aspirin be helping you put on the pounds?

Squid Invasion Followup

Dispatches from the cephalapod wars.

I'm far too amused that one of the squid experts is named Dr. Zeidberg.

Breaking our arbitrary laws.

Mule gives birth, biologists neenered and hounded.

I myself got stuck somewhere between the nutshell and the voluminous truth about how an alleged sterile mule might give birth, but suffice it to say, the genetic code of organisms is more plastic than our narrow familiarity with the animal wing of life may suggest. Bacteria, fungi and plants routinely run afoul of convention genetic understanding, so when an animal like a mule, which is already crossing over steep species barriers gives birth, it really shouldn't be too terribly surprising.

Still, maybe the gal just found a clever loophole out of being a pack animal.

The Invasion has begun

Giant squid launch shock and awe campaign.

The Monterey Bay Aquarium is like heaven on earth, I can see why they'd attack there first.

That is all.

Back from the Infarct Grave

Protein patch shown to regenerate heart tissue.

With heart disease still reigning supreme as the top killer of Americans, this kind of research ought to pick up some steam if it shows to carry its therapeutic effects from the rodent to man.

Heart attacks basically cause veins of tissue to die in the heart, and the healing process produces less useful scar tissue. If this protein patch can address that kind of problem, it's a big win for the home team. If it can go on to reverse problems for adults and help children with congenital issues, whoa boy.

Redefining snuggly

Angier has a new take on lab's best friend.

I've always had a soft spot for rats, which is why I raised many as pets during my college years. The heaps of rat anecdotes I possess are legion, but the most amusing could possibly be when Goya, my favored albino, had a staring match with my wife. Unfortunately, she didn't care for the fact the little furball knew how to get out of her cage.

Rats have personalities, and they can be glum or cheerful depending on their upbringing and circumstances. One study showed that rats accustomed to good times tend to be optimists, while those reared in unstable conditions become pessimists. Both rats will learn to associate one sound with a good event — a gift of food — and another sound with no food, but when exposed to an ambiguous sound, the optimist will run over expecting to be fed and the pessimist will grumble and skulk away, expecting nothing.

Too true. A rattle of potato chips was enough to drive my broods into quivering frenzy.

The Fatherliest of materials.

Natalie Angier waxes philosophic on Dad's genetic contribution.

Alzheimer Executioner

New reports are giving more information in the molecular cascade that leads to beta-amyloid plaques, and now certain genes have been identified as being predisposed to that condition.

The team said that the cell death caused by a brain injury such as a stroke or head injury enhances formation of brain-clogging amyloid plaques by means of a molecular chain reaction

In a series of experiments, they showed that "executioner" enzymes that kill brain cells during stroke or head trauma also interfere with the normal disposal of an enzyme that helps generate the plaques that are a hallmark of the illness.

This interference increases the level of the enzyme BACE in brain cells, they found.

BACE snips apart a brain protein called amyloid precursor protein to form a shorter protein called A beta peptide. It is this A beta peptide that is the building block for the amyloid plaques that clog up the brains of Alzheimer's patients.

Essentially, you've got an inhibitor of an inhibitor system going on, which forunately is easy to detect empirically, but more challenging to address therapeutically.

And it's important to get on this trail now, as the future looks to balloon Alzheimer's diagnoses. It appears, however, that the industry is going to capitalize on this to everyone's benefit. Pure science only goes so far, right?

Pissed Off Genius

Being angry helps in decision making.

These kind of experiments I find a bit cagey with the use of college students. Throw in a few dock workers, teenagers and DMV employees and lets see what shakes out. Still, I like some of the theory:

Once again, they found that the angry subjects were better able to discriminate between strong and weak arguments than the ones who were not angry—suggesting that anger can transform even those people who are, by disposition, not very analytical into more careful thinkers.

Does being angry boil away the superfluous and leave the critical? This is begging for follow up studies.

Ripsaw Robots #5

Ripsaw Robots will be a new feature that focuses on robotics in a very broad scope. From the useless to the revolutionary to the just plain giant and fantasy, Lish will bring you all the robot fix he can find.

Of course, I'm a bit distracted these days by my favorite fantasy robots as the merch/media juggernaut has begun to pick up speed. The NBA playoffs are now peppered with spots of comparing Lebron's dunking to Starscream's acrobatics and Tony Parker's teardrop shot to Bonecrusher's hatred of mass transit. I'm already on the prowl for a Softimus Prime for my son's clutching hands.

I bet many of you ask on a nigh-daily basis, "Why haven't I participated in a massive she-serpent fire spectacular today?" The lotus girls of the Serpent Mother offer probably one of the most awesome displays of snakes in years. Yes, years.

I for one have always been ready to welcome our robot overlords, but I was not expecting the revolution to begin with Danish lawnbots mowing down a man.



Still, most robots would rather be lovers than fighters, yes? I still can't stop laughing at this clip.

Promiscuous Teleology and all the fixins

Why some adults resist science and biased kids.

A great article over at Edge.com gives some insight to why so many American adults resist scientific facts.

There are two common assumptions about the nature of this resistance. First, it is often assumed to be a particularly American problem, explained in terms of the strong religious beliefs of many American citizens and the anti-science leanings of the dominant political party. Second, the problem is often characterized as the result of insufficient exposure to the relevant scientific facts, and hence is best addressed with improved science education.

We believe that these assumptions, while not completely false, reflect a misunderstanding of the nature of this phenomenon. While cultural factors are plainly relevant, American adults' resistance to scientific ideas reflects universal facts about what children know and how children learn. If this is right, then resistance to science cannot be simply addressed through more education; something different is needed.

I hear those two explanation all the time from exasperated rational pals of mine; a retrograde 'Merican attitude inserted into an atrocious science education program MUST be the culprit to all these psychic friends networks and fossil hoax theorists. But you scratch that thought enough and it becomes apparent that such an answer is rather unsatisfying. Looking back at kids and suggesting we're predisposed for this kind of thinking gives better perspective.

Our intuitive psychology also contributes to resistance to science. One significant bias is that children naturally see the world in terms of design and purpose. For instance, four year-olds insist that everything has a purpose, including lions ("to go in the zoo") and clouds ("for raining"), a propensity that Deborah Kelemen has dubbed "promiscuous teleology." Additionally, when asked about the origin of animals and people, children spontaneously tend to provide and to prefer creationist explanations.

The panacea for this is of course, the scientific experiment. When one has a real world observation, those long stretch connections are easily shattered.

I love the conclusions, however.

In sum, the developmental data suggest that resistance to science will arise in children when scientific claims clash with early emerging, intuitive expectations. This resistance will persist through adulthood if the scientific claims are contested within a society, and will be especially strong if there is a non-scientific alternative that is rooted in common sense and championed by people who are taken as reliable and trustworthy. This is the current situation in the United States with regard to the central tenets of neuroscience and of evolutionary biology. These clash with intuitive beliefs about the immaterial nature of the soul and the purposeful design of humans and other animals — and, in the United States, these intuitive beliefs are particularly likely to be endorsed and transmitted by trusted religious and political authorities. Hence these are among the domains where Americans' resistance to science is the strongest.

Not enough Crisco

An unpleasant new study suggests sunblock just isn't enough to prevent skin cancer. This likely comes as a shock to you, as most folks polled aren't that worried about sun damage.

Sunscreen itself works because it contains chemical groups known as carbonyls. These bonds have the ability to absorb damaging ultraviolet rays and release that energy as lower wavelength emissions in the form of heat or other radiation. Contrast that to heavy clothing which also absorbs the radiation but also reflects a portion, thus providing a more robust shielding from the rays.

Ninety percent of all skin cancers are directly a result of sun damage.

Paul Verhoeven, in his seminal work, Robocop, laced the film with a couple of very notable faux commercials, satirizing a dehumanizing capitalistic system with his dystopic vision. Unfortunately for us, it might be more factual than we hoped.

Still the #1 threat to America

Bear kills Moose in Alaska Driveway.

She tore apart the chest cavity, ripped out the heart and ate it," Gary said. "It was like she knew that's what kept it alive.

Oh my Science, Colbert was right.

When they say they have large shoes to fill

Indian men generally too small for condoms.

“As per international standards, most condoms are 150 mm to 180 mm in length and 44 to 56 mm in width. But data collected in Mumbai till 2001 showed that 60% of the participants measured 126 to 156 mm in length and 30% between 100 and 125 mm,’’ said a city researcher, pointing out that there was a difference of at least 5 cm in length.

No wonder they feel so threatened by Richard Gere.

That extra Earth environmentalists are always hoping for.

Earth-like planet found a mere 20 light years away.

One of those things that we have always predicted in our models finally materializes in objective reality. Still, a 13 day year sounds pretty wild. I'd be 858 years old by now, and would likely still vote for Kodos.

There's a reason I get mired in Wikipedia so often

Human brain hardwired for distraction.

They say the average American filters 3000 advertisements a day. I have trouble remembering how I was going to construct this sentence a few seconds back. I'm pretty sure I would have failed in an illiterate society.

Smuggling Reptiles the Hard Way

Woman attempts to smuggle three crocodiles strapped to body.

Woman was said to appear 'Strangely Fat.'

Tentacles on Ice

Fishermen net ultra-rare Colossal Squid. I recall as a youth that while occasional parts of these beasts washed up on shore or were found in the bellies of Sperm Whales, no person had ever seen one live. Over the years we've gotten the occasional peak, but this really takes the cake as a thousand pound squid was caught by chance.

At the time it was caught, O'Shea said it would make calamari rings the size of tractor tyres if cut up — but they would taste like ammonia.

Once again science shows not all dreams can come true.



Image credit: Ministry of Fisheries, New Zealand

Science has a big appetite

A great article over at the NY Times about the biological basis for morality. It would seem much like our use of tools, sophisticated language and sociable nature, our primate cousins show the building blocks of what humans carried forth into a set of moral ideas.

Religion can be seen as another special ingredient of human societies, though one that emerged thousands of years after morality, in Dr. de Waal’s view. There are clear precursors of morality in nonhuman primates, but no precursors of religion. So it seems reasonable to assume that as humans evolved away from chimps, morality emerged first, followed by religion. “I look at religions as recent additions,” he said. “Their function may have to do with social life, and enforcement of rules and giving a narrative to them, which is what religions really do.”

It's a central tenet of conventional wisdom that religion is the source of our moral code. It is the same wisdom people draw upon when they want to put a Ten Commandments shrine on State property or keep two men from kissing. What happens when science suggests that morality came before religion?

The idea that biology would continue to demand more and more territory from philosophy as it has been doing to religion for so many centuries is bound to be controversial. Clearly, the philosophers have a stake in this, but I do agree with one of their assessments:

and that is that biological analyses cannot cross the gap between “is” and “ought,” between the description of some behavior and the issue of why it is right or wrong. “You can identify some value we hold, and tell an evolutionary story about why we hold it, but there is always that radically different question of whether we ought to hold it,” said Sharon Street, a moral philosopher at New York University. “That’s not to discount the importance of what biologists are doing, but it does show why centuries of moral philosophy are incredibly relevant, too.”

You win this round, philosphers.