Slashdot Mirror
Cell Division Reversed for the First Time
SubtleGuest writes "Gary J. Gorbsky, Ph.D., a scientist with the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation, has found a way to reverse the process of cell division.
The discovery could have important implications for the treatment of cancer, birth defects and numerous other diseases and disorders. Gorbsky's findings appear in the April 13 issue of the journal Nature.
"No one has gotten the cell cycle to go backwards before now," said Gorbsky. "This shows that certain events in the cell cycle that have long been assumed irreversible may, in fact, be reversible."
In the lab, Gorbsky and his OMRF colleagues were able to control the protein responsible for the division process, interrupt and reverse the event, sending duplicate chromosomes back to the center of the original cell, an event once thought impossible.
Here is a video of it happening."
And here is the video of cell division. only its played in reverse.
WhatsAPro.com
Mark
It might not be too late to 'take back' that decision you made to have children 10 years ago?
... and we are loosing that war. i've heard many times, and have even caught myself saying, that there will be a cure for cancer soon. hasn't happened yet. so whenever i hear:
important implications for the treatment of cancer
i get my hopes up for a little while, just as most of the world has since the War on Cancer was officially announced in the 50's, and untold amounts of money have been spent by the NIH. but the truth is, i probably need to quit smoking to have the best chance at not dying from cancer.
-- sorry, my uncle just died from lymphoma this weekend, and i keep staring at the cigarette i'm smoking with a pained look.
i disable sigs
There must be a Cell processor story somewhere that Slashdot could post. That would make it three cell stories in a row. It's funny becuase it's repeated.
I've always assumed that most smokers are people with untreated ADHD. Has anyone read anything to indicate whether or not this is the case?
The positive effects of smoking (feeling calmed down and more focused) are the same effects of ADHD medication except, obviously, the medication won't cause cancer, it is given in a dose that is consistent through the entire day, and it is not addictive.
I'd be curious to find out if giving a smoker medication for ADHD would make it easier for them to quit.
Cow Cube
If this is for real, all I can say is
Holy shit!
It would be theoretically possible to create a certain protein which targets cell-specific division. Like cancer cells. It wouldn't eradicate the cancerous cells, but it would certainly slow or possibly stop the cells' replication.
Of course, I imagine the devil's in the details...
What could possibly hurt the security of the American people more than giving our own government the ability to hide its
I'm quite curious, could someone explain what sort of technology is used to observe chemical reactions at such a small level? (such as that in the video)
In Canada (I'm sure the USA is similar), the overall cancer rate is now 1 in 2 ... that's right 50% of the population will contract cancer at some point in their life (most of those will eventually die from it). Here's the real shocker. The Government response... (snip rant about carcinogens)
You're the victim of a very fundamental misunderstanding. The overall cancer death rate is actually 1 in 1. If you live long enough, you will eventually die of cancer. It's a perfectly-normal consequence of telomere loss due to aging.
As we get better at preventing and treating heart disease and other vascular problems like stroke, it's only reasonable to expect cancer death rates to rise. It is not reasonable to start leaping to wild-assed conclusions about carcinogens, cell phones, and conspiracies. None of those are the problem. The problem is that most of the low-hanging fruit in the health-care business has been picked, and only the hard problems like cancer (which, as others have noted, refers to a great variety of different diseases) remain.
Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
So one cell gets split and then they merge back together again and again?
Just like Eminem and Kim?
"a scientist with the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation, has found a way to reverse the process of cell division."
Eeewww!! Grosss!!
Anybody else also reminded of those "see me eat my hamburger in reverse" videos?
It's easy to lower the cancer death rate; make sure people die of something else first!
Males will all eventually get prostate cancer; the rates are rising because they aren't dieing of the things we traditionally died of in the past - communicable diseases, war, accident and heart disease.
If we got out and started a good war, fewer people would die of cancer! Think of Iraq as a big anti-cancer crusade.
Like my raincoat!
-:sigma.SB
WARN
THERE IS ANOTHER SYSTEM
The article doesn't say if the chromosomes merge back into one or not. I can't imagine that this would be possible, given the complexity of DNA. So does the cell just sit there with two sets of chromosomes. Also, would this be a way to build some kind of super muscle, with twice as many mitochondria?
It wouldn't. A smoker only feels "calmed down" because their craving has been satiated. The physical effects of nicotine increase stress on the brain and heart, they can focus because they're not constantly thinking about when they'll get their next hit, or how long they'll have to wait.
If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
Not only that, but many cancers are now curable if caught early enough. Especially cancers that are most common in children and young adults, because typically the tissues and cells that are in overdrive in the developing stages (and most susceptible to becoming cancerous) are less active in adulthood.
Good examples of cancers with excellent cure rates are Wilm's tumor, acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), neuroblastoma,retinoblastoma, and Hodgkin's lymphoma.
And this is just breaking the tip of the iceberg. Most of that NIH money actually goes to good use, unlike a lot of government spending.
Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a day. Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
I can use this cell undevision (fusion?) technique to revert myself to a giant sperm. And I'll be smart enough to choose the best genes before finding myself an equally oversized egg to start over. Who wouldn't want in-home eugenics?
How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
But nicotine is a stimulant just like ADHD medications are. Are you sure that there aren't multiple things going on at the same time here? I don't know anything about the biology, so you may well be right, but I'd be interested in a url to some information on a correlation or lack thereof between ADHD and smoking. Also, what do you mean by increased stress on the brain?
Cow Cube
I can't say whether or not you have ADHD, but I'd just like to correct a misconception that ADHD just implies a lack of attention. The name is a misnomer. ADHD is really about a lack of ability to control attention. An ADHD person will sometimes hyper focus to the exclusion of everything and sometimes have no ability to feel comfortable continuing to do anything for very long. Obviously, everyone falls somewhere on that sort of scale. It's just when someone hits those extremes too often that it is a problem.
Cow Cube
In Canada (I'm sure the USA is similar), the overall cancer rate is now 1 in 2 ... that's right 50% of the population will contract cancer at some point in their life (most of those will eventually die from it).
More people die of cancer because fewer people die of other things. Most (certainly not all) cancer is related to age. We are getting very good at living a very long time compared to what is "natural". The result is that old age disease take a heavier portion of our deaths. We have dramatically slashed the number of deaths to viruses and infection in first world nations.
Even cancer is less of a killer then it used to be. More people get cancer because they live longer, but more people survive cancer then ever. As far as sucking air goes, there has not been a better time to be alive (in terms of life span) so long as you are in a first world nation. It is entirely possible that most kids born in 2000 will live to see 2100. Hell, it is very likely that a large portion of the people who are just now leaving college will live to see 2100.
People who don't smoke, drink or do drugs, who eat properly, exercise regularly, watch their fat intake, get plenty of fiber, and do everything else right do NOT, in fact, live longer.
It just SEEMS like it's taking them forever to die.
The inverse of division is multiplication, so cell division is its own inverse.
*Kryten's head explodes*
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
The ability to return a cell to metaphase upon the removal of a chemical (Flavopiridol) which causes the mitotic exit of cells which are expressing non-degredatable Cyclin B is interesting, but it definetly tells us nothing about how to reverse this process in non-transformed human cells. The press release is a bit too effusive about the potential of this finding to radically transform the treatment of cancer, etc. as the finding primarily recomfirms the hypothesis that the degredation of cyclin B is what gives directionality to the cell process, and by blocking the degredation of Cyclin B, you can reverse the cell cycle.
And just in case you're confused like the submitter, there's way more than one protein involved in the cell division process in any eukaryotic cell; Cyclins like Cyclin B are very important, but it's a whole host of proteins that are involved in ushering the cell from G1 to S to G2 to M; assuring alignment, proper exit, arrest upon damage, etc. [One could even argue that the whole point of most cells is to divide, and so every bit of the cell is important and/or participates in some way in the process...]
http://www.donarmstrong.com
Slightly longer answer:
No, because this isn't a complete reversal of cell division. It doesn't somehow "un-replicate" the DNA, it just reverses one step of division in a cell about to divide.
Same position they're currently in, but with a little added motivation to stop procrastinating, and actually put their mind to it, rather than giving up, saying it's "too hard", blaming it on psych studies, finding any excuse other than accepting the fact that they're too complacent with their current situation.
..... "Oh, don't be so lazy - just get off your arse and DO something"
a) Who said anything about not trying to quit?
b) Who was blaming psych studies? I was simply trying to make the point that it *is* an addition, and about just how "easy" it is to quit. And the point is that it's NOT easy. Do you honestly think that so many people around the world - given what we know now - would still be smoking if it was just a matter of not bothering to buy the next pack?
What you are saying there illustrates my point perfectly. Too complacent? Looking for an excuse? That's just as absurd as what people said about clinical depression 20 years ago
just don't come running to me when you're diagnosed with a life threatening illness you brought on with your own behavior...
I would have no intentions of doing so - I'm very well aware of the fact that I started of my own free will, and I not going to be a hypocryte and blame the tobacco companies, either.
Oh, yeah - that reminds me.
Some of us are still around that started when it *wasn't* obvious or clear - to *anybody* - that smoking would do anything other than affect your wind. Hell - I competed in provincial long-distance cross-country and steeple-chase competitions while smoking a pack a day, and was on my varsity basketball & volleyball teams, and was able to run the mile in just under 6 minites. (I think my best time was around 5:53 or thereabouts - it was a LONG time ago). And I've been smoking a pack a day since I was 13 (it WAS cool to smoke back then, believe it or not). If you think I haven't tried numerous times over the years to stop, you'r e dreaming.
I'm glad the previous poster WAS able to quit - I'm sure he sees numerable improvements in his life because of it. But to say that not being able to quite is a sign of lazyness or just a lack of willpower shows a total ignorance of the subject.
Yes, I - and every other smoker - started of our own free will. And yes, it IS hard to quit - so try supporting those who are trying and hopefully succeeding, instead of pissing on those who *haven't* been able to do it yet.
A smoker only feels "calmed down" because their craving has been satiated
Actually, a smoker feels calmed down due to elevated levels of dopamine generated by the nicotine. While withdrawl symptoms can cause stress which is then relieved by more nicotine, that doesn't discount the stimulant effects of smoking.
you can quit. say this often.
i've been a non-smoker for 1 year, 51 weeks (my stop anniversary is 4/20! hah!)
the thing that finally worked for me was practice. you gotta practice quitting until you get it right. 1 day, 3 weeks, 14 months, whatever, if you fail, try again, and try again soon.
the other thing that helps in quitting is knowing yourself: why you smoke, why you want to smoke, what helps you not want to smoke, etc. self knowledge and a bit of determination is about all you need. oh, yeah, try a nicotine replacement.
me, i was a smoker for 18 years. i tried for the last 10 of those years to quit at least once or twice a year. in the last 4 of those years, i tried many, many times, each time getting a bit farther. this last time, i decided i didn't want to chew that frikin gum anymore, so i stopped chewing it and got on with my life. probably the best thing i ever did for myself.
you can do it. good luck.
It's not a cure for old age, its no longer possible after a certain point so you can't reverse an entire lineage back to one cell.
It's not going to reverse cancer either, for the same reason. What it *might* do, if you can determine on a cellular level which cells are cancerous, is halt the growth (assuming it doesn't just start dividing again. It doesn't even say if the DNA recombines, which I doubt it would do.
The real value is that old scientific standby, knowledge. Greater knowledge of what makes a cell tick, what factors trigger when its ready to divide will result in new cures, safer cures, and, of course, new understanding. If we can figure out why a cell divides, we can perhaps block those triggers and stop the division of cells like cancer. Greatly slowing or even stopping cell metabolism and division will be an important part of imposing a long term stasis or hibernation in humans experiencing long space travels to mars and the like. Understanding how to trigger cell reproduction could be one of the most important steps in reviving persons who have cyrogenically frozen themselves, too.
Demented But Determined.
I can't claim firsthand knowledge of whether ADHD medication would help a smoker quit, but I'll attest to the fact that on the occasions I skip my morning Adderall, I'm pretty damn likely to find myself in line for a pack of Parliaments later that day. And as long as I stay on the pills, that is for weeks at a stretch, I won't need to smoke at all. My doctor mentioned the same thing re: ADHD-type personalities frequently found to self-medicate with cigarettes, and it seems perfectly natural to me. Obvious, in retrospect.
This is also why I feel it's inaccurate to portray the dirty, disgusting habit of smoking as an unqualified negative. Take away a man's cigarettes and you'll increase his life expectancy twenty years, but if he's anything like me, you'll also turn him into a gibbering mess. And this has nothing to do with physical dependency--nicotine or amphetamines, I'm an equal-opportunity druggie. Either one lets me stay as focused and creative as I need.
Bonsai Kitten: TNG
There is a link through Dopamine levels. Have a look.
"You're everywhere. You're omnivorous."
ADHD medication? No. Depression medication? Yes.
Zyban, a fanfrickin'tastic smoking cessation pill, is simply remarketed Welbutrin. Welbutrin is an anti-depressant.
It seems that they discovered many of the smokers taking Welbutrin reported a marked decrease in cigarette cravings. Now you can buy the *exact* same drug with a different colour coating and a different name to help you quit smoking.
I have taken it. I was doing well, until a death in the family (non-cancer or smoking-related) buggered me up. Pathetic excuse, I know.
But while I was on Zyban I would literally go hours (unheard of any other time) without even thinking about a cigarette. It's really something else.
Downs syndrome is caused by an extra copy of chromosome 21.
If you have two copies of chromosome 18, you get Trisomy 18. Something you don't want. Basically, having extra copies of any chromosome is a 'bad thing'. Having an additional 23 pairs of chromosomes in addition to the normal 23 pairs, is extremely likely to lead to very abnormal cellular function.
While this is a very interesting finding in ways to manipulate events in mitosis, this isn't some miracle reversal of mitosis. It's a way to make a seriously messed up cell.
Define "nobody." It played just fine here, on an AMD64 Linux box with mplayer and Firefox's mplayer plugin.
PEBKAC.
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
Now we can prove evolution. Just reverse all the cells back to their previous state until we get back to the original single-cell organism.
OK. Sure, nobody would be around any more to see it, but that's beside the point.
It would also be a great opportunity for Earth to pass on that whole human mistake.
You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
WHY WOULD YOU POST A VIDEO THAT NOBODY CAN WATCH?
Here is the ASCII version:
frame 1: O........O
frame 2: O.....O
frame 3: O..O
frame 4: OO
frame 5: O)
frame 6: O
Table-ized A.I.