Health Science 20 – Critical Thinking Articles
Table of Contents:
Your Body Can Kill Cancer. It Just Needs Better Instructions. 3
Researchers have been programming peoples' immune systems to recognize and destory cancer. 3
Can We Live Forever? (VIDEO) 4
Cadell Last - Huffington Post Posted: 11/19/2013 9:20 pm 4
Transhumanism is the idea that we can (and should) use scientific knowledge to fundamentally transform the human form in order to improve human intellectual and physical abilities. 4
Mystery of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) may have finally been solved 6
How Having Three Parents Leads To Disease-Free Kids 7
A newly approved procedure lets scientists gather DNA from three people, then use it for in vitro fertilization. 7
STEM CELLS FREE SASKATCHEWAN MAN FROM CROHN'S 9
An App A Day: How personal trackers will change health care. 11
Knocking out Malaria 12
The first vaccine for one of the world’s most deadly diseases is on the way 12
Is Your Pee The Right Color? [Infographic] 14
How Studying Mummies Could Cure Modern Diseases 15
New Hope For Regrowing Severed Limbs, Just Like Lizards' Tails 17
Pretty good superpower to have, if you ask me. 17
FYI: Why Doesn't Plan B Work For Heavier Women? 18
Even a double dose of the morning-after contraception isn't likely to work. 18
Scientists Recreate The Sense Of Touch With Direct-To-Brain Electrical Signals 20
These findings could help researchers make prosthetic arms that have a lifelike sense of touch. 20
Bionic Hand Gives Amputee Real-Time Sensation 22
How Neuroscience Will Fight Five Age-Old Afflictions 24
The FDA Has Approved The First Artificial Pancreas 28
An easier way for diabetics to control their insulin intake 29
A Pill That Tells When It's Taken 29
Can We Reengineer Ourselves to Cope With the Effects of Climate Change? 30
Maybe. Although some of the ideas aren't pretty 31
Can Artificial Meat Save The World? 32
Traditional chicken, beef, and pork production devours resources and creates waste. Meat-free meat might be the solution. 33
Could This Liquid Replace Food? 41
Soylent, a milky beverage filled with nutrients, lets drinkers go without real food. Meet the inventor behind the stuff. 41
SELECTED INGREDIENTS* 42
How I Survived A Week Without Food 43
I consumed nothing but Soylent, a food-replacing beverage, for a week. Here's what happened to me (and my poop). 43
Your Body Can Kill Cancer. It Just Needs Better Instructions.
Researchers have been programming peoples' immune systems to recognize and destory cancer.
By
Veronique Greenwood Popular Science Magazine Feb 2014 Issue
Part of what makes cancers so insidious is that they’re not invaders: They’re our own cells turned against us. That means the body usually doesn’t see them as a threat. But over the last few years, teamsat several different research institutionshave been programming peoples’ immune systems to recognize and destroy cancer. So far, clinical trials of about a hundred terminal leukemia patients have shown some lasting effects. A single treatment has kept two of them cancer-free for three yearsand counting—after everything they tried had failed. Applying the technique to more cancers requires finding new targets to attack, says Michel Sadelain, an immunologist at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center who pioneered the approach. Exploratory clinical trials, including for lung and prostate cancers, are getting under way.
1)Capture T cells (the immune system‘s attack force) from the blood of a patient with B-cell leukemia.
2)Genetically engineer the T cells to train their sights on the CD19 molecule, which sits on the surface of B cells and the cancer cells that arose from them.
3)Inject the patient with the modified T cells, which may then destroy all cells with CD19—both cancerous and not.
4)Bolster the patient’s immune system with treatments of antibodies, since B cells normally make antibodies needed to fight infection.
Can We Live Forever? (VIDEO)
Cadell Last - Huffington Post Posted: 11/19/2013 9:20 pm
Transhumanism is the idea that we can (and should) use scientific knowledge to fundamentally transform the human form in order to improve human intellectual and physical abilities.
These ideas are usually connected with discussion about radical life extension, or even dreams of some form of immortality. I've previously discussed how even companies like Google are getting involved in the transhumanist desire for radical life extension. The cultural pressure for longer life seems to be growing quickly. But can we actually live forever (or at least radically longer)? The answer to that question is (sadly) unknown, but I wanted to make a video that contextualized our seemingly innate drive to seek immortality or eternal youth. Even before the emergence of modern science, humans fantasized about eternity:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cadell-last/can-we-live-forever_b_4293224.html
Hope me turning into a robot wasn't too scary! Of course, I want to emphasize that like our dreams of immortal life in pre-modern times, scientific dreams of immortality are far more diverse than I was able to convey in this video. Also, the idea of a technological singularity is very diverse. The one depicted above is definitely "Kurzweilian" in nature. However, as artificial intelligence expert Ben Goertzel has discussed in various publications, the singularity could happen in many different ways. This just means that a complete merger between humans and our machines is not the only way that superhuman intelligence could emerge. Theories range from Hugo de Garis' idea of an "Artilect War" to Francis Heylighen's idea of a "Global Brain" (which I have discussed before). And to make matters even more complicated, even different singularity scenarios are not mutually exclusive. I personally take the stance that our understanding of singularity will gradually be improved and refined as we get temporally closer to the emergence of superhuman intelligence, but as of now all we can do is propose untestable hypotheses. Either way, the idea is fascinating to contemplate.
Getting away from different singularities for a moment, I also want to emphasize that although some of the research discussed in the video may seem like science fiction, most of it is occurring in labs across the world right now. Research related to stem cell replacement organs and brain-interface technology is already moving forward at quite a rapid pace. This trend should continue as more people and companies with deep pockets invest in genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics. If you're interested in learning more about this research, I'd definitely recommend checking out George Church's interview discussing "brain healthspan extension," or Ed Boyden and Theodore Berger discussing brain-interfacing technology and nanotechnology.
From an anthropological perspective I can't help but marvel at our persistent desire for eternity. The phenomenon specifically makes me wonder if the yearning for eternity is in some way connected to the fact that we are the only species aware of our own finite existence. Philosopher Stephen Cave recently presented an idea similar to this at TEDx.
From Cave's perspective, the notion that science could cure aging and death is just one more "elixir" story, no different from the stories believed by ancient alchemists or medieval conquistadors. I know the neuroscientist Sam Harris has even gone so far as to call the singularity "science-enabled religion." From my perspective I feel like the possibility of radical life extension is definitely within our species' capabilities. Science has already proven that it can dramatically improve our health and longevity with surprising rapidity within just centuries.
Admittedly, science bringing the world population collectively closer to its evolved aging average is much different from science bringing the world population into a post-aging society. However, I maintain that whether or not we achieve radical life extension is dependent on how we decide to allocate our own resources and attention. A world with radical life extension would of course be profoundly different from the one we live in today. Almost every aspect of our existence is directly or indirectly based around the assumption that aging and death is an inevitable consequence of being alive. How would humans behave in a world where that wasn't the case? When confronted with this question, I tend to recall a talk by Stephen Wolfram, in which is said:
In the end, one way or another, effective human immortality will undoubtedly be achieved. And it will be the single largest discontinuity in human history. But I wonder what's on the other side?
What do you think?
1) Do you think this is possible or do you think this is fantasy? Do you think it’s possible in our lifetime?
2) Would you want to live forever?
3) Can you think of any disadvantages if our society suddenly could live forever?
4) Would you be worried about robots taking over if we developed “superhuman intelligence”?
Mystery of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) may have finally been solved
January 30, 2014
byDr. Steve Salvatore
Medical Expert
NEW YORK (PIX11) –There’s finally a possible explanation for SIDS, or Sudden Infant Death Syndrome.
Babies that die unexpectedly have underlying brain-stem abnormalities that are not normal before death, according to new research published in the December issue of Pediatrics.
The brain stem affects breathing, heart rate, blood pressure and temperature during sleep. Experts say these abnormalities prevent sleeping babies from waking up when they rebreathe too much carbon dioxide, when they don’t get enough oxygen or become overheated.
Even infants who were sleeping face down or next to an adult had these underlying brain-stem abnormalities.
What this means is that parents can finally let go of some of the guilt that they did something wrong. And doctors can now try to identify tests for healthy babies to see who’s at risk, and develop appropriate treatments.
In the meantime, safe sleep practices like a firm mattress could make a difference — no padding, stuffed animals or pillows. And putting your baby to sleep on his or her back can help. Also, don’t overheat your child, and don’t put covers over the head.
http://pix11.com/2014/01/30/mystery-of-sudden-infant-death-syndrome-sids-may-have-finally-been-solved/#ixzz2sa7CSzgp
1) Does this raise any questions for you?
2) Do you know how you slept as a child (back, side, stomach)? Any idea why it is now recommended that babies sleep on their back?
How Having Three Parents Leads To Disease-Free Kids
A newly approved procedure lets scientists gather DNA from three people, then use it for in vitro fertilization.
Outcomes: HS20 – MKS1: Justify ethical decision making processes based on an individual’s health.
HS20 – HB1: body systems and normal body functioning
By Virginia HughesPosted 09.30.2013 at 4:52 pm
This summer, government health officials in the United Kingdom made headlines by announcing that they will let scientists create babies with DNA from three different people. The procedure is a type of in vitro fertilization (IVF) that would allow women with mitochondrial diseases to have healthy babies. If approved by British Parliament, the method, known as mitochondrial replacement, would lead to a historic event: the first genetically modified humans who could pass down those genetic tweaks to their children.
Some bioethicists and media commentators have voiced concerns about the technique's safety because so far it's only been tested on human cells in the laboratory. More broadly, they fear it's a step toward designer babies and eugenics.
It's worth noting that IVF itself, which merges sperm and egg cells in a lab, also set off debate when it debuted 35 years ago. The procedure carries some small medical risks, such as a slightly increased chance of premature and low-weight babies, and creates many embryos that never get used. But let's not forget its enormous upside: It has allowed millions of couples to have children who couldn't otherwise. Mitochondrial replacement isn't any scarier—or any less impressive. Mitochondrial disease affects only about 1 in 5,000 people. The method will be performed at a few select clinics in the U.K. and will be carefully monitored. If it proves to be safe, then thousands of women will have the option to bear healthy biological children without giving them their disease. And if it's not safe, it will most likely be banned.
The method would lead to the first genetically modified humans who could pass down those tweaks to their children.
The most counterintuitive thing about mitochondrial replacement is that the babies it produces won't look any different from babies with only two genetic parents. Here's why. The genome thatyou might already be familiar with is the one in the nucleus of each cell that gets half of its DNA from mom and half from dad. However, everyone also has another genome, the mitochondrial genome, and that's what the new reproductive technique involves. Mitochondria are tiny power plants inside each cell that help turn the food you eat into a usable source of energy. Each has its own DNA, with about 37 genes that help the mitochondrion function properly. Unlike nuclear genes, mitochondrial ones don't affect a person's appearance or personality traits or most of what we associate with heredity. They are also inherited entirely from mom.
If someone's mitochondrial DNA has a lot of mutations, that person could end up with a host of problems, including muscular dystrophy, heart disease, and seizures. The mutations can even be fatal. So the new IVF method simply replaces mom's unhealthy mitochondria with healthy ones. Scientists take an egg from a female donor and remove the nuclear DNA, leaving behind her mitochondria. They then add nuclear DNA from the parents: the mother (who has mitochondrial disease) and the father.
Yes, the resulting baby will be the product of three individuals' genes, but, more important, it won't have a devastating disease. Although all reproductive technologies have the potential to create biological problems, they're far more likely to prevent them. Let's not let our fears get in the way of medical progress.
This article originally appeared in the October 2013 issue ofPopular Science.
STEM CELLS FREE SASKATCHEWAN MAN FROM CROHN'S
Postedby Joe Sornbergeron Wednesday, 05 February 2014inNews
http://www.stemcellfoundation.ca/en/blog/entry/stem-cells-free-saskatchewan-man-from-crohn-s
Rob McConnell’sCrohn’s disease struck about 13 years ago, when he was 20. The Elrose, Saskatchewan farm manager believes the stress of his father’s death had a lot to do with the onset of the debilitating disease -- and how hard it hit him.