Slashdot Mirror
Nanobacteria Discovered?
mfh writes "The BBC is reporting that a new form of life has been discovered, nanobacteria, which was previously only theorized by Finnish researchers Kajander and Ciftcioglu. A team lead by Dr John Lieske of the Mayo Clinic claims they have found irrefutable evidence of the existence of nanobacteria, which is likely responsible for a plethora of illnesses."
Great. more reasons never to leave my desk. so many nasty little bugs out there ;)
Machine9dotNet
http://www.uku.fi/~kajander/
Sounds like a new generation of biological weapons are waiting to be developed which would be far more difficult to detect...
....Slashdot readers have known about Darl McBride for a while now....
Do 10^9 nanobacteria make up a regular one?
I guess I'd better hurry up and get my patent for the anti^H^H^H^Hnanobiotics submitted.
-- Stu
/. ID under 2,000. I feel old now.
See also the article by John Cisar (a sceptic) An alternative interpretation of nanobacteria-induced biomineralization
I don't think this is proven yet. Some comments from other scientist in the BBC piece suggest that the methods they used can be prone to false positives. This is probably a good one to RTFM!
---
We spoke for about a half an hour. I don't recall a thing we said. - Colorblind James Experience
Um... bacteria aren't viruses.
that, with all the nanobacteria at the Mayo Clinic, Mr. Burn's got Three Stooges Syndrome.
In C++, friends can touch each others private parts.
Cue the obligatory "Only on MS machines" comments....
I have no sig yet I must scream.
What size particules can standard biofilter masks remove? The kind that the military use? Medical?
but how exactly do these buggers work? they're surely larger than viruses. Are they called bacteria because they are, in fact, bacteria, or just resemble them?
And what diseases do they cause?
--Eoban
Nanobacteria Photo Gallery
Send $10 to:
10000001 I am not original ave,
Redmond.
A very interesting discovery. In addition to potential breakthroughs in medical research, I wonder if these discoveries might shed some light on the evolution of the first procaryotes...
one word: medichlorians.
umop apisdn aw pow f,uop aseald
we start seeing "Lysol, effective against nanobacteria!"
seriously, sometimes you wish things wouldn't be discovered, because the people in the world cannot handle them. they run around "OMG! the end of the world is near because I've got bacteria!"
too much living in fear...
-- Who is the bigger fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? --
If these bacteria happen to attack micro-brains, our government is doomed!!!
now, how long until we have nanoyogurt?
How big are prions? are these classed as bacteria simply because they have "cell walls"?
Official GOD FAQ.
The Mayo Clinic is named after the famed 19th century doctor Charles Mayonowski. His family moved to the US from Poland in 1857 where they changed their name to remove the ethnicity of it (this was the mid 1800s, remember)
Charles was born in January 1850 but the exact date isn't known. He was an average student in early school but showed a strong interest in biology. His father would often find him in the barn late at night dissecting newborn piglets.
In 1869, Charles went to England to attend school at Oxford. He later received his medical degree but had to come back to America after suspicion was cast on him when several dozen fresh graves were robbed of their corpses and were later found wrapped in burlap in the university incinerators. (the bodies showed signs of expert dissection).
Moving to Minnesota, he founded a small clinic for the poor. Many of the patients disappeared but Mayo was found to be an excellent practitioner all around. When he died the funeral was attended by over 20,000 people. Many of them relatives of the poor who disappeared (and were presumed dissected) but knew of the importance of the knowledge he gleaned from his bloody experiments.
Actually... that's all bullshit. Sorry.
Trolling is a art,
r John Lieske of the Mayo Clinic claims they have found irrefutable evidence of the existence of nanobacteria.
They do not claim such a thing. They claim to have found potential evidence of the existence of nanobacteria. Alternate explanations of the evidence have already been given (false positive DNA test, for one).
potential != irrefutable
welcome our new nanobacteria overlords...
if only I had a 6nm can o' Duffs to present as a tribute.... Doh!
No man is an island, but Gary is a city in Indiana.
nannobacteria? Come on! Not just once, but several times in the article.
Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
Atkins is used to lose weight, these critters are already smaller than viruses.
Trolling is a art,
I think it's time for Lysol nanobacteria disenfectant.
Evolution or ID?
Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
We've slashdotted the Mayo Clinic.
Look's like Cthulu's cousin is getting busy!
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
Best. +5 Funny. Ever.
I wonder, could regular bacteria get infected by nanobacteria.
Evolution or ID?
This is yet another piece of evidence for the evolutionary theory. I'm so glad we keep on discovering new stuff even today to stick it to those creationists.
>>> Now I have to worry about nano-bacteria? Good grief --
, :)
>>> more viruses!
i suggest you to go back to school, bacteria has as much to do with viruses as chicken have to do with milking a cow.
ps. ofcourse as a computer software flaw is seen as a virus
windows may be considered a deadly bacteria which itself can be affected by viruses
I'd tell you the chances of this story being a dupe, but you wouldn't like it.
This, the researchers argue, means the nanoparticles were multiplying of their own accord.
Wouldn't this also occur if the sub-200nm chunks broke up further after filtration?
But US scientists report they have now isolated these cell-like structures in tissue from diseased human arteries.
Coronary artery disease causes around 50% of deaths worldwide. Large potential market for new cardiovascular drugs.
Whose stock price is needing a quick bounce upwards?
Interesting though.
A Discover magazine article talked about the recent dicovery that 1/3 of all life on Earth is methane creating or consuming bacteria beneath the ocean floor. Now we find a new type of life. Anyone else get the impression that we don't know s**t?
Crushing my karma one post at a time.
Don't worry, they're just medichlorians.
Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
The researchers had been trying to funding for years and were considered crackpots.
I think most of the story was set in Australia.
They may have called the little guys nanodes (or something very similar).
Anybody else see this?
From the article:
When the tissue was broken up, filtered to remove anything more than 200nm and the filtrate added to a sterile medium, the optical density - or cloudiness - of the medium increased.
This, the researchers argue, means the nanoparticles were multiplying of their own accord.
Doesn't sound exactly convincing. A lot of protein-like structures reproduce, but aren't considered to be alive. A good example is the prion that causes mad cow disease.
Weaselmancer
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
One of the major arguments against the life harboring theory for the meteorite found in Antarctica in 1984 by Roberta Score was that the signs of life it contained were an order of magnatude smaller than anything known to man. Perhaps these signs of nanobacteria merit reopening the mars rock investigation?
I for one welcome our new nanobacteria over^H^H^H^H underlords
lol. Set myself up for that one! - unass
According to this previous slashdot article, the bathroom would be cleaner.
and now Tom with the weather...
"But if you go back to how we defined life prior to our knowing about DNA, our criteria was that things multiplied in culture. This is what we have." And before we had telescopes, we defined the Earth as the center of the universe. Scientific progress can't just be ignored to suit your own purposes.
in bed.
Their definition of life is dependent on DNA, and that requires a certain size to work right.
::shrug::
Defining these may require a discovery of perhaps another way to have an instruction set. Maybe instead of a carbon chain, they have a certain arrangement of subatomic (or sub-subatomic?) particles/waves/strings that fulfill the same function.
perhaps research here will show that stupidity is a disease.
In 1996, nannobacteria came to the attention of the world's media when scientists announced they had found fossils in a Martian meteorite of what appeared to be nano-sized bacteria.
No idea if the lil critters originally went from here to Mars on board the rovers, or came here riding meteors...but if people are now debating whether or not they're alive, doesnt it also become a debate on whether whatever exists on Mars is life ?
The Dirty Work Group
I guess I'd better hurry up and get my patent for the anti^H^H^H^Hnanobiotics submitted.
Shhh... now that you've got a cool word invented, la low until someone invents a successful company called "nanobiotics" and sue the bastards for everything they've got. It's really all you need to do these days!
Scientists have been puzzled for ages now by the existance of infected bacteria. In fact, one of Dr. John Lieske's research assistants kept asking "How can a bacteria be infected? Don't they cause infections?" This constant harassment eventually led Dr. Lieske to discover the culprits... Nanobacteria. The only question that remains is how to explain those infected nanobacteria? Hmmm...
Moderation: +3 DorkYou really pressed one of my buttons here. Did you actually read the article and judge for youself or did you just assume that it was lousy based on the ISI impact factor? By the way the impact factor for the the journal in question, American Journal of Physiology, is in the "mid-range" (~3-4), but not horrible (there are journals with impact factors less than 1). In fact, the whole idea of impact factors is pretty controversial and has been abused as a criterion for promotions, grant awards, etc.
There's plenty of bullshit published in the "so-called" top tier journals (Science, Nature, Cell, etc.) and plenty of excellent science published in what you are calling a low-impact journal.
Also, the group working on nanobacteria had to revise their work seven times - this is an unheard of level of skepticism and suggests that there is an unusual level of politics going on here.
is that a British thing?
According to dictionary.com:
[Greek nnos, nannos, little old man, dwarf, from nanns, uncle.]
This seems to imply that the Brits have it right... so why does America use nano instead of nanno?
Oh, and by the way, does that mean that these are bacteria from little old men? 'cause that's just disgusting....
Now, of course, the question becomes: How long will it take to weaponize them?
- undoware.ca
This article from five years ago suggests that, while nanobacteria may not be responsible for the genetic flaw that causes PKD, they may exacerbate the situation and cause the cysts to grow at a much faster rate.
The article uses 2 n's, but slashdot uses only 1. Is this nanNobacteria? That would make more sense, since bacteria are already super small, it's hard to imagine some form of life being one billionth the size of a bacteria cell.
stuff |
mean the Western world. Since we live in a fetishistic society reliant on social and global inequality in order to be using this medium of communication at all, I assume we ignore the portion of the planet which clearly doesn't matter enough.
I doubt GlaxoWellcome have much to gain from developing better de novo antimalarials for instance. Whereas anything that might give the average western white male a better chance of survival no matter how tenuous is of course financed to the hilt.
file that patent in the EU, it's legal there now.
if you hurry it's probably still up for grabs
"Lame" - Galaxar
--A different Anonymous Coward than the first Anoymous Coward
But that's so cool! That's precisely what makes life so much fun (well, except for girlfriends). It would be a really, really boring place if everything was already figured out, all problems solved, nothing to invent, nothing left to do but watch old sitcom re-runs.
What gets me, is that the way my memory is, someday Im going to repeat that story to other people thinking it was true. "Did you know that the Mayo guy was mad crazy?"
Who is this Karma guy and why is he bad ??
They're both on a farm?
If so one can imagine that, as with other pathogens, there are different natural susceptibilities to said autoimmune diseases in different populations from different human ecologies.
It may be that this is the underlying mechanism that seems to be driving up the rates of autism among populations high in Finnish ancestry and recent increases in immigration from India. Liberalization of immigration laws in European-derived populations and a rather aggressive affirmative action program within India aimed at dismantling the caste system there may have unleashed something on particularly susceptible populations and it may prove very difficult to ferret out what that something is if it turns out to be nanobacterium.
Seastead this.
Chocolate Covered Nanos...
Years later, a doctor will tell me that I have an I.Q. of 48, and am what some people call "mentally retarded".
Yeah, you'll read about it on Snopes.com one day.
:)
"Was the founder of the Mayo Clinic really a psycopathic butcher?"
...even her germs have germs.
I remember hearing about Kidney stones or something being caused by nano bacteria causing concretions when serum levels of the "building materials" got too high.. If they exist (and the kidney stone thing isn't a myth), I wonder if other concretions (like iron concretions in the ocean) are caused by similar processes.
meh
That's nothing new, I've been living one for years!
The U.S. really needs an English to Wisdom dictionary.
20 years of research into this and patent
;)
medicine should almost be completely abolished.
If any of us are still alive, that is
Most life as we know it uses DNA as its basis, but some primitive bacteria use RNA, As do some viruses, which aren't "technically" alive (ie: they need a host lifeform to spread, not just an organic media.)
OTOH, DNA and RNA aren't the only protiens capable of being used to pass on information. I read the articles but couldn't find anyone investigating to see if there's a possibility that nanobacteria use Prions to self replicate.
Seems like a possible avenue, since they did find DNA like activity, but couldn't (so far) find any DNA.
(Would this even be possible? Or am I just blowing smoke anally?) };->
The U.S. really needs an English to Wisdom dictionary.
Didn't you hear? Bill wants to be on every desktop ;)
Therefore, if these particles are capable of replication, they must rely on some host cell for additional complex components, which places them in the category of 'not-truly-alive-on-their-own', like the viruses.
At this time, it is more correct to refer to these things as 'nano-spheres', NOT 'nanobacteria'.
mhack
Building a better ribosome since 1997
Why does it seem like everyone assumes that if something is alive, it will have DNA? Admittedly, science fiction shouldn't be my primary source for information on biology, but even the news article implies that most biologists assume that alien creatures (or even possibly undiscovered creatures here on Earth) will have DNA. In my (admittedly uneducated) mind, it's like saying all computers will be programmed in C, a ridiulous proposition.
I'm proud of my Northern Tibetian Heritage
Bigger fleas have smaller fleas
Upon their backs to bite'em
And smaller fleas have lesser fleas
And so ad infinitem.
And the bigger fleas, in turn
Have greater fleas to go on
And these in turn have greater still
And greater still, and so on.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prion
Beverley: It appears to be a nanobacterial infection, Captain. It's resequencing Barclay's DNA.
Picard: Can you reverse the process?
Beverley: Not until after the next commercial break.
Barclay: Could we let someone *else* have *his* DNA resequenced next week? This is getting old.
Why do those scientists debate so much about whether those "beings" are lifeforms or not ? Even if we do not classify them as alive, if they are newly discovered to play an important role in many diseases, this discover is extremely interesting anyways.
Proper hygiene is an important contribution to fighting disease, but a lot of people are obsessed with cleanliness.
There's an entire industry that caters to these folks. Disinfectant wipes, hand sanitizers, germ-killing floor wash, etc. There are even germ-killing laundry additives. Most of these don't do anything more than proper use of hot water and soap (and occasionally bleach) will do.
But getting cynical for a moment: These nanobacteria are a great marketing opportunity. Hucksters can hype soaps, wipes, and so on that are "anti-nanobacterial." Quack doctors can advertise herbal remedies and enema preperations that blast the little devils out of the body.
I think I'll sell some high-tech stocks and invest in this fad!
Stefan
I believe it was called: midichlorians
Before I part with'em: two pennies weigh ~4.996+/-0.014g, have a zinc core, and the face of Lincoln. You can keep 'em.
(1) is cellularly or molecularly organized
(2) does it respire (use energy and produce waste)
(3) does it grow
(4) does it adapt
(5) does it reproduce
The best we can say at this point is that viruses have some properties of life, and some lifeless properties. But life is not an either/or proposition, it exists on a contiuum. At what point is a heart-attack victim alive or dead? Is he alive until he loses consciousness? Until the heart stops? Until the brain dies? Until the body can no longer be revived? Is it even possible to pinpoint the moment where at one nanosecond he's alive (100%) and the next nanosecond he's dead (100%)?
Is a multicellular organism alive the when an egg cell has been fertilized? When only one sperm has made it to the egg, and is halfway through the egg cell wall? 90% through? 99.9% through? Before or after the genetic material has been integrated? Before or after it undergoes mitosis?
The first clue (other than it appearing in Slashdot...) was something that sounded groundbreaking but published in an obscure clinical journal.
After looking the abstract up on Pubmed, it smelled even worse.
Recap: their "evidence" is based on 3 findings
1. Presence of DNA from staining and uridine incorporation.
2. Increased cloudiness of solution after filter sterilization.
3. Electron microscopy.
None of this is very *good* evidence. Pretty much any small (nan[n]o)particle could have these properties. For example activated charcoal will absorb dye and hydroxyapatite will bind uridine. Colloidal aggregates can and do form in sterile solutions, resulting in increasing cloudiness. And everything looks like small balls under EM.
What they didn't show and what would have been more convincing was PCR to actually find some novel sequences (RNA or DNA). Also some evidence to show that these things actually multiplied like bacteria - i.e. does uridine "incorporation" increase with time at an exponential rate.
Finally, a quick Google search reveals a possible motive for this (other than NASA trying to get more money) I don't know how valid the concerns are but they seem plausible
http://drcranton.com/nanobacteria.htm
Now we just need someone to invent/discover nano-penecillin.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
They are just Midichlorians. Nothing to worry about...unless your evil.
As we move inexorably towards increased space presence, we'll find more and more interesting replicating chemical reactions that warrant further study.
At what point does a chemical reaction pattern become defined as life?
If we were to find intelligent life on other planets, even capable of our more advanced technologies (telecommunications, computing, etc.) we would surely have no difficulty in classifying that as "life" - but most assuredly there would be no trace of DNA as we know it.
It's even unlikely that such life would be based on the carbon cycle we find here on Earth.
Samples of "life" such as these nanobacteria (or whatever they end up being called) are an excellent example of such a chemical process.
One of the things I find so fascinating about the Sciences is that there is no conclusion, no theory of operation, and no information set considered incontrovertible - everything is subject to revision and peer review, and only under these intense circumstances can truth truly be found... eventually.
Wow!
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
AG Cairns-Smith is famous for his theory that the first forms of life on earth were actually mineral in nature. Only later did they evolve the ability to synthesize, manipulate and control organic molecules. Eventually the organics got so sophisticated that the life forms dropped the mineral part and we got the kind of life we have today.
One of the interesting things about these nanobacteria (or nannobacteria as some people (mis?)spell it) is that they seem to be associated with minerals. In fact part of the controversy over the recent experiments is whether the apparent reproduction of the nanobacteria is possibly just mineral crystal growth. And the nature of the mineral shells associated with the nanobacteria is similar to known non-organic mineral growth.
It's possible that the skeptics are right and there is no life here, just a natural process. But if minerals are growing and replicating as little balls, that really does call to mind Cairns-Smith's theory. If these minerals could then catalyze organic reactions to maintain the chemical state which promotes their growth, we'd essentially have the pre-biotic life forms that Cairns-Smith postulated.
Maybe nanobacteria are remnants of an earlier stage of life in which organisms were part mineral, part organic. They might not have DNA or RNA in the way life does today, but be some strange symbiosis that we have never seen before.
I suppose it's the same thing as viruses and prions. Do you consider a strand of proteins (or in the case of prions, a protein) a form of life? Though since all life as we know it is just a bunch of proteins, maybe they are.
By the way, does this mean that prions have lost the title of smallest recognizible organism? Anybody?
"By and large, language is a tool for concealing the truth." - George Carlin
Since the little bugs seem to do their evil work by accumulating calcium deposits, maybe this is a new market for LimeAway. :-)
...and sequence it and do a bit of cladistics to show that we really are seeing DNA from a new family of organisms - then I'll believe it. I don't think that's a lot to ask for either if they're managing to actually see these things reproduce.
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
These "nanobacteria" are smaller than viruses. I bet they have as much in common with bacteria as viruses do. (i.e. the term "nanobacteria" is a misnomer - bacteria they ain't.)
"A team lead by Dr John Lieske of the Mayo Clinic claims they have found irrefutable evidence of the existence of nanobacteria, which is likely responsible for a plethora of illnesses."
In other news, researchers at the Ketchup Clinic have discovered Nano-cells which when combined with any other cell, makes it taste better.
Are these nanobacteria the same thing as the nanobes mentioned previously on Slashdot?
are things likely to get wet? I know this is a stupid question, but it occurse to me that Lysol would never touch these little buggers because the surface tension of the droplets might bee to high and it wouldn't wet the small crevices in the skin.
Dumb question, and mostly idle curiosity really.
Why do I have this? I don't smoke.
I call dibs on the Anti-NanoBacteria Soap Patend!! WooHooo, I'm gonna be rich! Somebody call Oprah.
Dr. Phillipa Uwins, an electron microscopist from Queensland Australia found nanobes less than 100 nanometres big when analysing core samples returned from petrochemical exploration.
1999 Discovery
Interview on Robin Cook's Science Show.
Nanobacteria Nabobot Nanotube What's next ? Nanosoftware I guess in the next century "pico" will be the new buzz word.
Sure, but the domain name nanobiotics.com is already almost two years old (and apparently for sale!). So I wouldn't be too confident on the 'inventing a new word' bit. :)
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
RTA - it mentioned the nanobacteria being smaller than viruses.
+++ATH0
>> I guess I'd better hurry up and get my patent for
>>the anti^H^H^H^Hnanobiotics submitted.
Could someone tell me what the " ^H^H^H^ " stands for?
thankyou
Don't feel like you need to be chained to your desk to avoid all those nasty microbes out there! For the very reasonable price of only $4,055, I will sell you a sterile bubble you can enjoy life in!
Hurry! This special offer is for a limited time only. Don't miss out on the chance to be rolled down a steep hill, see the glare of the sun on your very own bubble, and breathe the poorly recirculated air!
On vit, on code et puis on meurt.
You're assuming all life must have DNA (or RNA) to be alive and reproduce. Surely there are other ways a living thing could exist than that specific set of atoms arranged that specific way.
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
nanometre-sized organisms reproducing: obviously it's grey goo. Some evil genius has built a molecular assembler and released it on the world.
The author of this post asserts his moral rights.
No article on Nanobacteria would be complete without a reference to Philla Uwins. A geologist who in 1999 was inspecting (deep, hot and old) drilling samples from the Western Australian coastline with a scanning electron microscope discovered unusual possible life forms from 20nm to 150nm, christening them nanobes. Well below the accepted 200nm miniumum thought possible for life. (it is thought that no living thing can contain the necessary machinary in containers below 200nm).
What followed is probably more interesting than this reported story (the discovery of nanobes in blood and their possible link to disease predates this article). Things started to hot up in the nanobe world when some research money came forward to see if these nanobes contained the necessary DNA to disprove the many *non life advocates*. Even physicist Paul Davies (Australian centre for Astrobiology) pondered the possibility that nanobes could be a possible link between life and non-life.
Armed with some results the Unwin team sent off a paper to every *major* reputable scientific journal only to have them turned down. The most common reason.... too controversial.
So I read this story and think of *mayo* clinic and the *ohhh must be reputable* tag that goes with it and thinking why hasn't Nature or some other journal taken so long to publish these ideas?. Science publishing appears to be more about convincing publishers (and peers) less about looking at the data.
The postscript to the story: The dot com crash in 2000 killed off more research into the DNA tests, the possible application of the nanobes into eating plastic (nanobes had a voracious appetite for petri dishes) and a potential commercial spin off. Phillipa still works at UQ.
assorted links
http://www.uq.edu.au/nanoworld/uwins.html
http://aca.mq.edu.au/PaulDavies/pdavies.html
http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s201
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/science/ss/stories/s13
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,427
peterrenshaw ~ Another Scrappy Startup
Proof of nanobacteria leads to nano-antibiotics and their abuse will lead to resistant nanobacteria....
My wife is right: it's the little things that get you!
Doesn't this sound familiar
The boy nodded his understanding. "Can I ask you something?" The Jedi Master nodded. "What are midi-chlorians?"
Wind whipped at Qui-Gon's long hair, blowing strands of it across his strong face. "Midi-chlorians are microscopic life-forms that reside within the cells of all living things and communicate with the Force."
"They live inside of me?" the boy asked.
"In your cells." Qui-Gon paused. "We are symbionts with the midi-chlorians."
"Symbi-what?"
"Symbionts. Life-forms living together for mutual advantage. Without the midi-chlorians, life could not exist, and we would have no knowledge of the Force. Our midi-chlorians continually speak to us, Annie, telling us the will of the Force."
"They do?"
Qui-Gon cocked one eyebrow. "When you learn to quiet your mind, you will hear them speaking to you."
Anakin thought about it for a moment, then frowned. "I don't understand."
Qui-Gon smiled, and his eyes were warm and secretive. "With time and training, Annie, you will."
"Taligent is still pure vapor. Maybe they'll be the last who jumps up on Openstep... "
*Yes, hand-sowing of the last crop's seeds by a subsistence farmer is artificial. If God didn't put it there, it's artificial.
**Every imporant staple has been genetically engineered for thousands of years. The animals too, for that matter.
A massive dose of a pure opiod causes dramatic and unmistakable constipation. I can eat enormous amounts of wheat with little problems. The above hypothesis is thereby falsified. A huge number of vegan chicks were nutjobs before they went vegan.Could someone tell me what the " ^H^H^H^ " stands for?
It's basically an escape sequence for the backspace key. If you see ^W, that deletes the last word instead of the last character.
Here's the journal article in question. 1: Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2004 May 13 [Epub ahead of print] Related Articles, Links Evidence of Nanobacterial-like Structures in Human Calcified Arteries and Cardiac Valves. Miller VM, Rodgers G, Charlesworth JA, Kirkland B, Severson SR, Rasmussen TE, Yagubyan M, Rodgers JC, Cockerill FR, Folk RL, Kumar V, Farell-Baril G, Lieske JC. Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; Department of Physiology and Biophysics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. ... click the link to see the summary.
bacteria, being a PROCARYOTE, has NO organelles. only EUCARYOTA has them. organelles are former procaryotes living symbiotically inside eucaryotic cells
SHE does throw dice.