Slashdot Mirror

All right, make me dig up the facts. Here the claim is 60mg of Nicotine is estimated to do the trick. And NIDA claims that a typical cigarette contains 10mg (or more). So, if those figures are correct, my statement should be revised to reflect that 6 cigarettes administered orally constitutes a lethal dose. I had read somewhere that 1 was sufficient, although I can't recall the source. I didn't pull that number out of my ass -- I pulled it out of someone else's ass ;) Thanks!

The thing that they are trying to test is a theory called tensegrity - the idea that changes in cell shape might be transmitted to the nucleus to alter gene expression. A couple of good reviews of this are here and here here. How changes in cells relate to whole organism physiology (like bone loss in microgravity) is a whole other can of worms, though.

I could pick apart their science, but they were very successful in doing one thing - getting a ride on the Vomit Comet. I hope they get the movies that they are after ...

The thing that they are trying to test is a theory called tensegrity - the idea that changes in cell shape might be transmitted to the nucleus to alter gene expression. A couple of good reviews of this are here and here here. How changes in cells relate to whole organism physiology (like bone loss in microgravity) is a whole other can of worms, though.

I could pick apart their science, but they were very successful in doing one thing - getting a ride on the Vomit Comet. I hope they get the movies that they are after ...

Now what would be really cool would be funding for an employee in the FOIA Office whose job is to check p2p-shared documents for accuracy and post information about problems. But that is likely to have to wait for more enlightened times.

Contrary to popular belief, Fischer didn't emerge from the womb a full-blown grand master. While he was learning the game, as a child in Brooklyn, he was essentially a hotshot club player--a prodigy, to be sure, but not obviously world-championship material. But at age thirteen, in 1956, Fischer made a colossal leap. That year he became the youngest player ever to win the U.S. Junior Championship. He also dominated the U.S. tournament circuit. What was astounding wasn't simply that a gawky thirteen-year-old kid in blue jeans was suddenly winning chess tournaments. It was the way he was winning. He didn't just beat people--he humiliated them.

Maybe the onset of puberty "turned on" his mental illness. This article and others seem to suggest that puberty can trigger an underlying mental condition. In fact, this article says:

Social phobia is the irrational fear and avoidance of being in a situation in which a person's activities can be watched by others. In a sense, it is a form of "performance anxiety," but a social phobia causes symptomsthat go well beyond the normal nervousness before an on-stage appearance. People suffering social phobias intensely fear being watched or humiliated while doing something--such as signing a personal check, drinking a cup of coffee, buttoning a coat or eating a meal--in front of others. Many patients suffer a generalized form of social phobia, in which they fear and avoid most interactions with other people. This makes it difficult for them to go to work or school, or to socialize at all. Social phobias occur equally among men and women, generally developing after puberty and peaking after age 30. A person can suffer from one or a cluster of social phobias.

Sounds like Mr. Fischer to me!

Since tryptophan to 5-HT' is a substrate limited rxn there's no need for a feedback mechanism, thus excess tryptophan ends up driving 5-HT" production. So it would make sense that an SSRI might drive 5-HT" via increased 5-HT' concentrations. But it doesn't appear to do so at all PubMed. The SSRIs that affected 5-HT" levels did so by inhibiting degradation. Fluoxetine (Prozac) had no such effect. I suspect fluoxetine was prescribed simply on the basis that severe insomnia and depression are associated (i.e. whether insomnia is a symptom or a cause of the depression). As an aside I don't know why anyone would take tryptophan when 5-HT" can be bought at vitamin stores. It doesn't make sense to drive 5-HT' production to supraphysiological levels just to get a little 5-HT".

Why Does The Sun Shine?

forgive if you know this, i just wanna run through a few things. (starin' at my biochem textbook)

so the receptors on the outside of a cell membrane have a corresponding G-protein within the membrane. normally, when the receptor is stimulated, the G-protein will bind a GTP, which in turn activates adenylate cyclase.

the adenylate cyclase is important because it converts ATP into cAMP, which is then free to float around the cell and act as a messenger. (cAMP tends to appears when the cell is low on energy)

normally, this signal fades over time because the GTP is phosphorylated to GDP. cholera toxin prevents the phosphorylation of the G protein-GTP complex, so the receptor does not turn off, and excess cAMP builds up.

cAMP is a transcription factor for all kinds of hormones, cytokines, etc. when the toxin hits your intestines, one of the consequences is that the fluid levels are out of whack and you get diarrhea, which is the primary problem of cholera.

since the toxin can disrupt the cells metabolic processes, it is quite capable of killing cells. if the level of toxin is high, enough red blood cells can die and blockages in those tiny little capillaries in the kidneys, causing them to stop working pretty suddenly. (Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome )
http://kidney.niddk.nih.gov/kudiseases/pubs/childk idneydiseases/hemolytic_uremic_syndrome/ if so, hope you're rich/lucky enough to get dialysis.

bottom line: yes, cholera toxin isn't fun stuff, but for the majority of cases it matters most whether or not you're hydrating properly.

whee! too much information man to the rescue!

• Pichierri, F., 2004
• Xiang et al., 2004
• Schiffer et al., 2003

• Pichierri, F., 2004
• Xiang et al., 2004
• Schiffer et al., 2003

• Pichierri, F., 2004
• Xiang et al., 2004
• Schiffer et al., 2003

"These results show that, for the test conditions described here and on an equal-weight basis, if carbon nanotubes reach the lungs, they are much more toxic than carbon black and can be more toxic than quartz, which is considered a serious occupational health hazard in chronic inhalation exposures."

Not sure I'd wear a shirt or even chain mail made of these things....

After all the point of having a lot of different kinds of Major Histocompatibility Complex alleles in the population is that somebody in the population will have the right combination of MHC genes to be a responder to an arbitary infection and so survive to breed.

The flip side of this is that many people are prone to getting autoimmune disease as a consequence of getting certain infections. Crohn's disease is likely triggered by a bacteria.

Certain HLA antigens are bad to have. Such as HLA B27 which makes one a sitting duck for autoimmune disease. People with that can get Reiter's syndrome (a form of autoimmune arthritis) from something as simple as food poisoning. As bad as HLA B27 sounds, it is likely to provide protection against something, much like sickle cell trait protects against malaria.

Biological diversity means there is less likelyhood of a large scale wipeout of the population, but also that there will be many people who get diseases due to things like having a bad HLA antigen (such as B27).

Any protection from viruses that HLA antigens could provide likely could be circumvented, as HLA antigens are not secret at all. They are use in diagnosing autoimmune disease, matching organ transplants, etc.

It is roughly equivalent to a computer virus writer having access to all the patterns that an anti-virus program is designed to detect.

After all the point of having a lot of different kinds of Major Histocompatibility Complex alleles in the population is that somebody in the population will have the right combination of MHC genes to be a responder to an arbitary infection and so survive to breed.

The flip side of this is that many people are prone to getting autoimmune disease as a consequence of getting certain infections. Crohn's disease is likely triggered by a bacteria.

Certain HLA antigens are bad to have. Such as HLA B27 which makes one a sitting duck for autoimmune disease. People with that can get Reiter's syndrome (a form of autoimmune arthritis) from something as simple as food poisoning. As bad as HLA B27 sounds, it is likely to provide protection against something, much like sickle cell trait protects against malaria.

Biological diversity means there is less likelyhood of a large scale wipeout of the population, but also that there will be many people who get diseases due to things like having a bad HLA antigen (such as B27).

Any protection from viruses that HLA antigens could provide likely could be circumvented, as HLA antigens are not secret at all. They are use in diagnosing autoimmune disease, matching organ transplants, etc.

It is roughly equivalent to a computer virus writer having access to all the patterns that an anti-virus program is designed to detect.

Since the discovery of Helicobacter pylori, which indeed causes ulcers.

The link I gave doesn't say so, but as far as I know it is strongly suspected that it is indeed contagiuous.

You could download the human denome database from the NCBI. All the files are here.

You could download the human denome database from the NCBI. All the files are here.

No wonder we're a nation of fatasses.

This should not be modded insightful (maybe funny). Hypertrophy cardiomyopathy does not generally cause heart attacks the first time you exercise.

That if I want to show my dick to interested parties, I can't, because I'm then somehow 'less than human', despite the fact that I chose to show my cock?

That if I want to show my dick to interested parties, I can't, because I'm then somehow 'less than human', despite the fact that I chose to show my cock?

You aren't supposed to eat foods made with milk, which includes cheese. However there are supplements that you can eat that don't contain lactose. Learn about lactose intolerance here.

Ok, if you want to talk about lies and liars--and imply GW Bush (I assume that's who you are implying?) is a liar--what's an example of a lie he told?

I'll bite, but only because I think this is important... Anyone still remember stem cells?

"As a result of private research, more than 60 genetically diverse stem cell lines already exist. They were created from embryos that have already been destroyed, and they have the ability to regenerate themselves indefinitely, creating ongoing opportunities for research. I have concluded that we should allow federal funds to be used for research on these existing stem cell lines, where the life and death decision has already been made." - George W. Bush, 8:00 PM CDT, Aug 9, 2001. (Bold mine)

Information on Eligibility Criteria for Federal Funding of Research on Human Embryonic Stem Cells. Now, count the number of lines available for use with federal funds under the regulations provided by Bush. Granted, it's been a while since grade school math, but I'm fairly certain that 19 is NOT "more than 60".

"Embryonic stem cell research is at the leading edge of a series of moral hazards... My position on these issues is shaped by deeply held beliefs... I also believe human life is a sacred gift from our Creator. I worry about a culture that devalues life, and believe as your President I have an important obligation to foster and encourage respect for life in America and throughout the world... I have made this decision with great care, and I pray it is the right one." - Also G.W. Bush, several excerpts from the same speech, which in my opinion speaks to the "messenger of God" mentality.

Not only that:

" I will also name a President's council to monitor stem cell research, to recommend appropriate guidelines and regulations, and to consider all of the medical and ethical ramifications of biomedical innovation. This council will consist of leading scientists, doctors, ethicists, lawyers, theologians and others, and will be chaired by Dr. Leon Kass, a leading biomedical ethicist from the University of Chicago." - also same speech.

Leon Kass, of course, has a long history of such things as testifying in State of Michigan v. Jack Kevorkian against assisted suicide, fighting against human cloning, and also brings us such wonderful quotes as:

"But more importantly, in my own teaching, I discovered that the BIBLE was a book that could more than hold its own with the great works of philosophy and literature that I had been teaching to undergraduates.... And the classes that I've had on Genesis, Bill, have been the best classes I've ever taught. I don't lecture. I mean we sit and read these stories, and they take to them-- like thirsty men and women to water... You don't have to be a Jew or a Christian to believe that we are in touch with powers of inspiration that summon us. There are powers that speak through us." - Leon Kass, interview with Bill Moyers, July 25, 2003

Human Body Temperature

Quote: A body temperature of 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit is considered normal.

Miller RA, Extending life: scientific prospects and political obstacles. Milbank Q 2002 ;80(1)

Sreekumar R, et al, Effects of caloric restriction on mitochondrial function and gene transcripts in rat muscle. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 2002 Jul ; 283 (1) / E38-43

Jolly CA, et al, Life span is prolonged in food-restricted autoimmune-prone (NZB x NZW)F(1) mice fed a diet enriched with (n-3) fatty acids. J Nutr 2001 Oct;131(10):2753-60.

Hansen BC, et al, Calorie restriction in nonhuman primates: mechanisms of reduced morbidity and mortality. Toxicol Sci 1999 Dec / 52 (2 Suppl) / 56-60.

Local satellite cells residing outside the muscle fibers answer this call. First these muscle-specific stem cells proliferate by normal cell division, then some of their progeny fuse with the muscle fiber, contributing their nuclei to the cell. Both progrowth and antigrowth factors are involved in regulating this process. Satellite cells respond to insulinlike growth factor I, or IGF-I, by undergoing a greater number of cell divisions, whereas a different growth-regulating factor, myostatin, inhibits their proliferation.

Another article by Sweeney on the ethics of using gene threapy in athletes is in Discover. The main point here is that since you can drive overexpression of human IGF-1 injected directly into muscle (as opposed to the circulation), this is an essentially undetectable method for "doping" athletes.

Muscle doubling in cattle with the same gene was publishedin 1997, with extraordinary photos of a Belgian Blue bull: HERE

The National Cancer Institute received just shy of five billion in funding in 2004; they're asking for six in 2005. Although I would like to see them receive more funding (I work in cancer research) I'm willing to cede an amount less than 1% of NCI's budget to other worthwhile projects.

Similarly, a great deal of money is spent in all the areas the parent poster lists. Does more need to be done? Certainly. Does that preclude any spending at all on anything else? Nope.

Further, this sort of prize will hopefully encourage additional spending by private industry far beyond the value of the prize--this has certainly happened with the X-Prize. If NASA can get a couple of private companies to develop competing orbital craft for a $100 million prize, rather than spending one billion of their own R&D dollars, isn't that money well spent?

Parasites are "sparring partners." It has been suggested that parasites are the reason for sexual reproduction. Sexual reproduction increases a gene line's ability to adapt rapidly, so when the environment (other than the parasites) changes, gene lines that have a history of being challenged by parasites will be better able to adapt to the new environment.

As does the US, from time to time.

As does the US, from time to time.

As does the US, from time to time.

Good for you. There is nothing as beautiful as a psilocybin trip once in a while.

Yes, but you, 3,4-methylenedioxyme, should watch out for Ecstasy-induced toxicity in rat liver

Academia is far from as pure as the public might imagine. It is troubled with the same problems as the rest of society.

For those who don't know of him, George Ricaurte is the NIDA scientist which recently had to retract a severly flawed paper on MDMA neurotoxcity. Part of the problem is that NIDA is in the business of sustaining the War On Some Drugs, a multi billion business. It is in their interest to sustain funding for research that confirms the basis for this "war". Researchers which come up with results that are contrary to this cause (ie. which debunks common myths of toxicity and other perceived dangers) are committing career suicide.

The MDMA neurotoxcity paper by Ricaurte came under heavy fire for flawed methods when it was first released (mostly from partisan researchers with nothing to lose). The paper has since been used to push anti-MDMA legislation (like the RAVE act), both in the US and in other countries. The main reason the paper was retracted was the discovery that Ricaurte and his team hadn't even used MDMA in their animal toxcity experiments, but a completely different chemical. A small error (as Ricaurte claims) or evidence of very foul play? The company which supplied the chemicals claim that such a mixup is absurd and extremely unlikely.

Still, this has only put a small dent in Ricaurte's reputation, since he is working for the "good cause". The science behind it doesn't seem to be important, it's the underlying goals. He is now involved in new NIDA research with the same goals as before, to "prove" that MDMA is an inheritly dangerous and evil chemical.

For more information about the retraction, see the retraction itself and the response from MAPS.

Science is the a very good method to make the world understandable, but the public would do well to be a tad more sceptical and understand that a scientific degree is no automatic proof of pure intentions or valid results, there is almost always bias. Especially when there are large sums of money involved.

I'd say that the human genome is fairly open source.

Not really. It is true that the software is widely distributed (and packaged in a handy interpreter!)

But it's rather aggressively copy-on-write; changes generally show up in the child rather than the parent

There's even a government program to try to stamp out self-modifying code!

So: widely distributed, yes. "Open source": not hardly.

Well, like everything, this is a complex issue. A lot of data is already "open". You can go to NCBI and download the entire genome of SARS or Bacillius anthracis (Anthrax) if you so wish.

Also, if you are creating bioinformatics tools on Federal funding (NFS, NIH), a lot of times the stipulation is that the source code must be made available. This makes sense because your peers has to make sure that the way you did your calculations are actually correct. If people are to use your data or program in their publications, your program had better be correct. Many times there are no way to tell except to look at your source code.

But before we talk about open source, the real issue is standarization of formats. Bioinformatics is like a jungle right now, and every one has different formats for describing the same thing. NCBI has their formats, the europeans have theirs, and it's a terrible mess. I just spent the past week writing code to parse PDB files. This format has been around for ages, and is so inadequate. File formats designed by biologists do not lend themselves well to compuation. What we need right now is an open standard, based on XML and open APIs for parsing these standard files. This will go a long way towards information sharing, and can save a lot of duplicated effort.

Just some examples of how bio very much is open already..

In biotech software, there's lots of open source. BioJava, BLAST.. etc.

As for what they're talking about, e.g. databases.. Most data already IS open. The human genome, protein structures and sequences.

The Human Brain project funds neuroinformatics projects, many of which are released under free or open source licenses.

The adulteration of orange juice: In 1990 an employee of Sun Up Foods, an orange juice processor, told the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that the company had set up secret rooms in its facilities to hold tanks of liquid beet sugar, a common adulterant of orange juice.

Why would anyone use rabbit shit in coffee? Chicory is the standard item used to dilute or adulterate coffee.

We can contemplate the Ford Pinto without much further comment.

How about a little Alfatoxin in your peanut butter!

Need a chest X-Ray or a really fast sun tan?

Or maybe you want to take a trip in Sir Geoffrey de Havilland's Comet?

And if you still think that you can consume or use products or services without paying close attention, I have a bridge to sell you.

Their wipe tests were performed after dust was allowed to accumulate for at least five days. Let's suppose that I regularly remove and ingest the dust from 200 cm^2 of my computer. That would be licking the dust off about thirty square inches of my computer's case.

In that case, I'm being exposed to 40 ng per week, or about 2 micrograms per year. That's about 0.1 mg over the course of my lifetime--a tenth of a milligram.

A recent literature review(1) (abstract and full text) gives a threshold for toxicity due to octa-BDE (the most toxic compounds studied in the wipe tets) as 2 mg/kg (fetal toxicity/teratongenicity, rat and rabbit models.)

The most toxic compound being phased out (penta-BDE; not measured in the wipe tests) affects neurobehavioural development from 0.6 mg/kg (rat and mouse models.)

The carcinogenicity of these compounds is not well-characterized, however any effects seem to appear at much higher exposures that one would expect in the real world.

In other words, these compounds bear watching and the fact that they are bioaccumulative is troubling--but they're definitely not something to panic about. I'd also be more concerned about ingestion from other sources--bioaccumulations in fish and eggs--rather than from your computer hardware. Those problems, in turn, can be addressed through proper disposal of retired computer equipment.

(1) Darnerud PO. "Toxic effects of brominated flame retardants in man and in wildlife." Environ. Int. 29(6):841-53 (2003).

Their wipe tests were performed after dust was allowed to accumulate for at least five days. Let's suppose that I regularly remove and ingest the dust from 200 cm^2 of my computer. That would be licking the dust off about thirty square inches of my computer's case.

In that case, I'm being exposed to 40 ng per week, or about 2 micrograms per year. That's about 0.1 mg over the course of my lifetime--a tenth of a milligram.

A recent literature review(1) (abstract and full text) gives a threshold for toxicity due to octa-BDE (the most toxic compounds studied in the wipe tets) as 2 mg/kg (fetal toxicity/teratongenicity, rat and rabbit models.)

The most toxic compound being phased out (penta-BDE; not measured in the wipe tests) affects neurobehavioural development from 0.6 mg/kg (rat and mouse models.)

The carcinogenicity of these compounds is not well-characterized, however any effects seem to appear at much higher exposures that one would expect in the real world.

In other words, these compounds bear watching and the fact that they are bioaccumulative is troubling--but they're definitely not something to panic about. I'd also be more concerned about ingestion from other sources--bioaccumulations in fish and eggs--rather than from your computer hardware. Those problems, in turn, can be addressed through proper disposal of retired computer equipment.

(1) Darnerud PO. "Toxic effects of brominated flame retardants in man and in wildlife." Environ. Int. 29(6):841-53 (2003).

The buildup of ketones is very similar to what happens to diabetics who don't regulate themselves strictly enough. It's one of the leading causes of many of the health problems diabetics suffer from.

No, it is not, despite the close spelling. In one case, you have breakdown of body's ability to process carbohydrates by a process called insulin resistance. Kidneys need to produce more and more insulin for the cells to process the carbs into fat. Eventually you get into a point where the kidneys cannot supply enough insulin and the blood sugar shoots thru the roof.. And you have got type II diabetes.

And the acidosis is what happens when you intake too many carbs (!) when you have diabetes. In other case, you're consuming very small quantities of carbs by choice, so your body switches over to processing fat instead of carbs for energy. The ketones replace glucose. So in fact the two conditions are caused by exact opposite behavior.

I'm not going to root thru pubmed looking for terribly many references, but here's one

They recommend low carb diet as a safe and efficient way of controlling seizures in children with parkinson's.

By implication, it would hardly be a recommended treatment if ketosis was in some way a harmful or dangerous state for the body to be in.

"Aging is a response to mutations which naturally build up over time."

This is probably true. Scientists recently announced a mouse strain engineered without the component of mitochondrial DNA Polymerase responsible for mitochondrial DNA repair (DNA Pol, of which there are several types, is the enzyme complex that copies DNA in the mitochondria or the nucleus [as well as in bacteria]). The net result of intentionally damaging the mitochondrial DNA Pol was that the mice aged twice as fast as normal. This is confirmed by the fact that to the best of our knowledge the human mitochondrial genome is the smalled mitochondrial genome in the animal kingdom. Most of the mitochondrial genes in humans have been moved into the nucleus where they are safer, most probably from free radicals but perhaps other toxins as well. The DNA repair mechanisms in the nucleus are more robust as well. There are 120+ DNA repair genes/proteins known. Most of them are active in the nucleus. There are many many fewer active in the mitochondria.

So we know mutations in the mitochondrial genome result in faster aging.

As has been pointed out by others mutations in genes in the nucleus can quite often lead to cancer. Most often these are Point Mutations where a single base is changed. However the more severe mutations are caused by "loss-of-heterozygosity" (a.k.a. gene conversion) due to Homologous Recombination DNA Repair copying a bad gene over its previously good sister gene. It can also be caused by Double Strand Break DNA Repair which can cause microdeletions or microinsertions in the DNA sequence. Over time the code becomes corrupted and fails to function as efficiently (if it functions at all). These two pathways HR and DSB repair are the repair pathways of last resort -- there are many enzymes that attempt to return DNA to functional condition before it gets to the point of requiring one of these pathways.

It is also worth noting that the proteins produced from the two genes involved in the more common accelerated aging syndromes in humans [WRN: Werner's Syndrome and LMNA: Progeria] are active in the nucleus.

Side note to readers: When I started in biology slightly more than a decade ago the genes causing the two diseases listed above were

not known. That shows you how fast we are moving.

So mutations in the nuclear genome can cause either cancer or accelerated aging.

[Interestingly, WRN is involved in the DSB repair process and LMNA is involved in the structure of the nucleus.]

"Most aging is the slowing down of metabolism so as the reduce cell activity in order to reduce mutations."

This is *NOT* at all clear. Proteins whose genes have been corrupted may not fold properly. If they do not fold properly they are broken down. So energy resources may be depleted due to an endless cycle of creating proteins that are non-functional and must be recycled. Or proteins essential for mitochondrial function may be non-functional or missing. Thus more free radicals are produced, producing more mutations, resulting in more defective genes in an endless downward spiral. A reduction in "effective" metabolism may not be intentional (to reduce mutations) but simply a side effect of the other processes involved in aging. And the net result may be that the

"Aging is a response to mutations which naturally build up over time."

This is probably true. Scientists recently announced a mouse strain engineered without the component of mitochondrial DNA Polymerase responsible for mitochondrial DNA repair (DNA Pol, of which there are several types, is the enzyme complex that copies DNA in the mitochondria or the nucleus [as well as in bacteria]). The net result of intentionally damaging the mitochondrial DNA Pol was that the mice aged twice as fast as normal. This is confirmed by the fact that to the best of our knowledge the human mitochondrial genome is the smalled mitochondrial genome in the animal kingdom. Most of the mitochondrial genes in humans have been moved into the nucleus where they are safer, most probably from free radicals but perhaps other toxins as well. The DNA repair mechanisms in the nucleus are more robust as well. There are 120+ DNA repair genes/proteins known. Most of them are active in the nucleus. There are many many fewer active in the mitochondria.

So we know mutations in the mitochondrial genome result in faster aging.

As has been pointed out by others mutations in genes in the nucleus can quite often lead to cancer. Most often these are Point Mutations where a single base is changed. However the more severe mutations are caused by "loss-of-heterozygosity" (a.k.a. gene conversion) due to Homologous Recombination DNA Repair copying a bad gene over its previously good sister gene. It can also be caused by Double Strand Break DNA Repair which can cause microdeletions or microinsertions in the DNA sequence. Over time the code becomes corrupted and fails to function as efficiently (if it functions at all). These two pathways HR and DSB repair are the repair pathways of last resort -- there are many enzymes that attempt to return DNA to functional condition before it gets to the point of requiring one of these pathways.

It is also worth noting that the proteins produced from the two genes involved in the more common accelerated aging syndromes in humans [WRN: Werner's Syndrome and LMNA: Progeria] are active in the nucleus.

Side note to readers: When I started in biology slightly more than a decade ago the genes causing the two diseases listed above were

not known. That shows you how fast we are moving.

So mutations in the nuclear genome can cause either cancer or accelerated aging.

[Interestingly, WRN is involved in the DSB repair process and LMNA is involved in the structure of the nucleus.]

"Most aging is the slowing down of metabolism so as the reduce cell activity in order to reduce mutations."

This is *NOT* at all clear. Proteins whose genes have been corrupted may not fold properly. If they do not fold properly they are broken down. So energy resources may be depleted due to an endless cycle of creating proteins that are non-functional and must be recycled. Or proteins essential for mitochondrial function may be non-functional or missing. Thus more free radicals are produced, producing more mutations, resulting in more defective genes in an endless downward spiral. A reduction in "effective" metabolism may not be intentional (to reduce mutations) but simply a side effect of the other processes involved in aging. And the net result may be that the

As I understand it, GenBank is just a catalogue of gene sequences, which is to say, the end results of data analysis. This is equivalent in the astronomy world to a catalogue of galaxies or stars or whatnot (which virtual observatories will also include). Of course you can get new science from such a database, but it's a very different kettle of fish to making available all the raw data that the geneticists used to derive the gene sequences in the first place, which could be even more useful (well, I imagine so, but perhaps it wouldn't be useful at all to other geneticists). So a virtual observatory is not mere hyperbole, IMHO, because it can be used to make what are effectively "new" observations of astronomical objects, as well as datamine previously compiled catalogues (a la GenBank, or in astronomy, NED or SIMBAD).

Erm, well, I'm rambling a bit so I'll shut up now.

Depends. Uncle Sam can keep the rights (doesn't happen that often), or give it to who makes it- but Uncle Sam gets a free license to use it. Verbage needs to be included in the patent application: "This invention was made with government support under (grant/contract number) awarded by (institute, agency). The Government has certain rights in the invention." Uncle Sam would be able to retain worldwide patent rights as well. Could this perhaps be a nice way to generate some revenue to cover our deficit? (source: NIH)

Links didn't work, oops. I really must start using preview more: first second third fourth

Links didn't work, oops. I really must start using preview more: first second third fourth

Links didn't work, oops. I really must start using preview more: first second third fourth

Links didn't work, oops. I really must start using preview more: first second third fourth

I don't trust these batteries, though. Nanotech has great potential, but it also has great potential environmental hazard. We're talking about tiny microscopic needles, small enough to manipulate individual molecules and cut right through cellular membranes. It's no surprise that CNTs are highly toxic. I would expect the same for silicon nanotubes.