I hate to admit it, but Digg is starting to overshadow Slashdot (though Digg comments are horrible). This story was on Digg a few days ago. In fact, if you look at Digg's homepage right now, you can almost be certain that one of these stories will appear on Slashdot in the next few days. Sad. But true.
The HIV virus does not "embed" itself into the dna of a victim. It inserts it's rna into t-cells and uses the t-cells to replicate itself. The problem is that this kills the t-cells, thus killing you. The HIV virus has no chemical affinity for the rest of the cells in your body - thank God, otherwise it would destroy just about every part of the victim. It does NOT hide away and wait to pop out the second a victim stops taking his or her cocktail.
As for the blood-brain barrier: the barrier is made by what are called "glia cells." Or more specifically, astrocytes, a type of glia cells. The lipid membranes of these cells only allow certain molecules that are lipid soluble (non-polar) to enter the brain barrier. That is why when you add only one acetyl group to morphine, it becomes heroin and can act on the brain simply because it is non-polar enough to pass through the barrier. Most anti-viral drugs can indeed get through this barrier. Even if that were not the case though, HIV is a blood pathogen and circulation in and out of the brain would likely be enough to contact all HIV molecules with the anti-viral medication. How else would today's HIV cocktails work? HIV does NOT camp out and slowly kill neurons. At all. It cannot attack neurons. Only t-cells. When enough of your t-cells are attacked and killed, you get AIDS.
wow, i have no idea how PETA has not FLIPPED. i have killed a lot of hamsters/mice/rats in my days working in a neuroendocrinology lab and we had to go through hell applying for/making sure our protocols for killing the animals were up to snuff with federal regulation. i wonder how they got permission for the strangulation.
plus, it's a rediculous study anyway. what "genes" are they talking about? i assume that they are activated in response to a lack of oxygen because thats what the article stressed. in that case, they could probably just measure lactic acid (lactic acid is the product of an alternative pathway to make ATP when oxygen is not available), degredation products of lactic acid, or ph level in the cytoplasm of the animals cells (ph drops when lactic acid is produced). also, the RNA that they saw an increased transcription of would likeley degrade before any reasonable conclusions could be made.
as a last note, if the genes they saw activated were from the pressure of the strangulation, this tells the forensic scientists nothing because the original goal is to determine if "whether someone died by strangulation or suffocation, rather than by some other means," especially in cases where there are no other physical clues. strangulation pressure always leaves a mark.
yeah, google talk sucks now, but mostly because it is not AIM compliant (about 80% of my friends are on aim as i am sure yours are). i have a good feeling it will get much better in the near future. as for desktop, i dont know about that one, never tried it. but they certainly have the minds working there to do it.
The AIM of this deal is clearly to take over the instant messaging market, aka, AIM. With Google's ability to throw together amazing software (look at Gmail), I see a skype-esque but better client that supports itself via ads by scanning your conversations (maybe - if they push it that far - backlash might be too big). Personally, I would not have a problem with that, but I say no to cyber sex.
Google had to sacrifice quite a lot to snag this deal but if you take over instant messaging, you can take over voip, hence, you can take over telecommunications when cell "phones" can simply operate via wi-fi. I say, good move Google - I love you baby.
step one: read a few books on the process of becoming a surgeon. there is no step two. i'm not talking about advanced stuff here... things like intubation, putting in a central line, etc - all routinely learned on the underprivileged.
Sadly, abusing the underprivileged and poor for medical reasons occurs more frequently than one would think. For example, in addidtion to drug testing, during surgical residencies, most of the interns learn new procedures on the homeless or poor that in the hospital. Residents have to learn techniques somehow, and they are inevitably going to deliever sub-par results the first few times of doing something. Thus, the practice of using the underprivileged as "test-dummies" is unstated but widley accepted. Ideas for solutions to this moral dilemma?
Slashdot Mirror
haha, who is this? and yes, why are there so many columbia ppl on so late?
I hate to admit it, but Digg is starting to overshadow Slashdot (though Digg comments are horrible). This story was on Digg a few days ago. In fact, if you look at Digg's homepage right now, you can almost be certain that one of these stories will appear on Slashdot in the next few days. Sad. But true.
As for the blood-brain barrier: the barrier is made by what are called "glia cells." Or more specifically, astrocytes, a type of glia cells. The lipid membranes of these cells only allow certain molecules that are lipid soluble (non-polar) to enter the brain barrier. That is why when you add only one acetyl group to morphine, it becomes heroin and can act on the brain simply because it is non-polar enough to pass through the barrier. Most anti-viral drugs can indeed get through this barrier. Even if that were not the case though, HIV is a blood pathogen and circulation in and out of the brain would likely be enough to contact all HIV molecules with the anti-viral medication. How else would today's HIV cocktails work? HIV does NOT camp out and slowly kill neurons. At all. It cannot attack neurons. Only t-cells. When enough of your t-cells are attacked and killed, you get AIDS.
wow, i have no idea how PETA has not FLIPPED. i have killed a lot of hamsters/mice/rats in my days working in a neuroendocrinology lab and we had to go through hell applying for/making sure our protocols for killing the animals were up to snuff with federal regulation. i wonder how they got permission for the strangulation. plus, it's a rediculous study anyway. what "genes" are they talking about? i assume that they are activated in response to a lack of oxygen because thats what the article stressed. in that case, they could probably just measure lactic acid (lactic acid is the product of an alternative pathway to make ATP when oxygen is not available), degredation products of lactic acid, or ph level in the cytoplasm of the animals cells (ph drops when lactic acid is produced). also, the RNA that they saw an increased transcription of would likeley degrade before any reasonable conclusions could be made. as a last note, if the genes they saw activated were from the pressure of the strangulation, this tells the forensic scientists nothing because the original goal is to determine if "whether someone died by strangulation or suffocation, rather than by some other means," especially in cases where there are no other physical clues. strangulation pressure always leaves a mark.
yeah, google talk sucks now, but mostly because it is not AIM compliant (about 80% of my friends are on aim as i am sure yours are). i have a good feeling it will get much better in the near future. as for desktop, i dont know about that one, never tried it. but they certainly have the minds working there to do it.
The AIM of this deal is clearly to take over the instant messaging market, aka, AIM. With Google's ability to throw together amazing software (look at Gmail), I see a skype-esque but better client that supports itself via ads by scanning your conversations (maybe - if they push it that far - backlash might be too big). Personally, I would not have a problem with that, but I say no to cyber sex.
Google had to sacrifice quite a lot to snag this deal but if you take over instant messaging, you can take over voip, hence, you can take over telecommunications when cell "phones" can simply operate via wi-fi. I say, good move Google - I love you baby.
step one: read a few books on the process of becoming a surgeon. there is no step two. i'm not talking about advanced stuff here... things like intubation, putting in a central line, etc - all routinely learned on the underprivileged.
Sadly, abusing the underprivileged and poor for medical reasons occurs more frequently than one would think. For example, in addidtion to drug testing, during surgical residencies, most of the interns learn new procedures on the homeless or poor that in the hospital. Residents have to learn techniques somehow, and they are inevitably going to deliever sub-par results the first few times of doing something. Thus, the practice of using the underprivileged as "test-dummies" is unstated but widley accepted. Ideas for solutions to this moral dilemma?