San Francisco, 12:57 AM
Sun Dec 20
11 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
Editor-in-Chief:
Annalee Newitz |
News Editor:
Charlie Jane Anders |
Associate Editor:
Meredith Woerner |
Assistant Editor:
Lauren Davis |
Weekend Editor:
Graeme McMillan |
Contributors:
Joshua Glenn
Stephen Goldmeier |
Ed Grabianowski |
Austin Grossman
Paul Hogan |
Lauren Davis |
Chris Hsiang |
Lynn Peril |
Ann VanderMeer
Alasdair Wilkins |
Graphic Designer:
Stephanie Fox |
Interns:
Tim Barribeau |
Julia Carusillo |
Alex Eichler |
Cyriaque Lamar |
Caitlin Petrakovitz |
Mary Ratliff |
Josh Snyder |
I am little surprised that Science has included Ardi because there is a lot about questions and disagreement about her. That is not surprising to be sure, but the team that has the fossils will not let any other groups look at her or confirm their findings. This is not a good sign.
It doesn't mean that they are wrong, but there have been a lot of instances where upon further examination things become... a lot less concrete. That is, they make some really bold conclusions with Ardi regarding her possible bipedalism...
The Discovery Channel had a special about this not too long ago. Their website has some clips from the show as well as an interactive handbook that details the discovery of Ardi.
i'm no nurologist but isn't there a rather large degree of difference between actual alzheimers and 'an alzheimers like state?' i guess what i'm asking is, given that you wouldn't ordinarly given someone whos organs are failing new organs without treating the underlying disease first, why wouldn't the transplanted never cells just succomb to alzheimers themselves? i mean it's a protien folding disease and the 'bad' protiens are still there right?
@aubreyf: Are you implying Artificial Cheese Food Product is not the same as Cheese?!? ^_^
Yeah, good call. Whatever is causing the nerve loss in the first place isn't going to be fixed by adding new cells. It might improve the person's condition short term, but the new cells would more than likely succumb to the same fate as the old ones.
Sadly I can imagine them sending people in for "routine implantation" of nerve cells in order to maintain functionality. This of course would be a great money machine, as it treats the effect and not the cause. Of course one has to wonder if the treatment would even take in an alzheimers patient... or if the disease would block the new cells from integrating in the first place.
@Akitsu: This research seems to be looking at exactly the question of whether such a treatment would take in Alzheimer's patients, and suggests that it would work at the least for some useful duration. Given that the cells apparently came from different source rats, they might or might not succumb eventually.
If it is only a temporary fix? Then, no, it's not as good a solution as curing the underlying condition. But it's better than the no-solution-whatsoever we had previously. Needing regular treatment (say, every six months) sucks compared to being cured forever, but it does beat having your brain turn to swiss cheese. And if we do find a way to fix the underlying condition, it'll still be useful to have a way to reverse any initial damage that occurred before the disease was discovered.
Plus, this research doesn't claim to be the final word. It's a good first step, is all.
@Ghost_in_the_Machine: That would make a nice arc for sweeps. He gets fixed & is evil, but in the end elects to let someone re-insert the crayon in his brain. Let's say, mmm...
Mo.
@John Hazard: I wouldn't be surprised if there is a story arc like this. Of course Walter will reverse the procedure in the end so he can be a good father to Peter. Apparently you can't be an evil genius and a good parent at the same time.
@Chip Overclock: Actually, I mean the guys in Afghanistan and places like it who are trying not to get in the way of bullets or improvised explosive devices.
@Dr Emilio Lizardo: Mrs. Overclock (a.k.a. Dr. Overclock, Medicine Woman) and I heard an interesting talk by an Army surgeon about all the advances they've made in emergency medicine in Afghanistan and Iraq. One of the surprising results is that it's often better _not_ to give blood transfusions. Blood loss activates the body's natural defenses against further blood loss. Giving blood often deactivates these mechanisms and actually leads to greater blood loss. (He also mentioned that if you do give blood, use whole blood.) He had slides of the mobile ER beds they can roll onto a cargo plane (complete with support staff) and have a critically injured patient at a major modern hospital in hours. Interesting stuff, complete with lots of slides shot in Iraq.
@Chip Overclock: Trauma is outside of my expertise - especially battlefield trauma thank god. I do know that the traditional cutoff for a blood transfusion is a hemoglobin of 8g/dl and anything lower tends to make most doctors pretty nervous. However, a young healthy person can tolerate a hemoglobin substantially lower than that - say around 6 or so. Now, it is different if you get there slowly or quickly but a strong young soldier in his/her early 20's can probably tolerate that.
Deliberately means he did it knowing that an earthquake could happen, right? Was he on site when they were drilling? 'cause that would be stupid.
And why would he deliberately cause an earthquake? Nobody wins in an earthquake, especially the guy who caused it. Odds are he'll end up falling into a fissure or being crushed by falling debris.
I don't know anything about Swiss law, but from an American law perspective it seems bizarre that they're apparently charging him under a criminal statute with an intent requirement. In the U.S. this would more likely be a civil negligence case; I can't see it being prosecuted criminally assuming (as seems to be the case) that he had the necessary permits and was in compliance with applicable regulations.
12/17/09
It doesn't mean that they are wrong, but there have been a lot of instances where upon further examination things become... a lot less concrete. That is, they make some really bold conclusions with Ardi regarding her possible bipedalism...
12/17/09
[dsc.discovery.com]
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
And how did that spammer get in here?
12/17/09
12/18/09
I'm not ready to go without Discworld yet! And I'm sure Terry Pratchett isn't either.
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
Also what are "never cells" and what happens when you inject them into your brain? :P
12/17/09
Yeah, good call. Whatever is causing the nerve loss in the first place isn't going to be fixed by adding new cells. It might improve the person's condition short term, but the new cells would more than likely succumb to the same fate as the old ones.
Sadly I can imagine them sending people in for "routine implantation" of nerve cells in order to maintain functionality. This of course would be a great money machine, as it treats the effect and not the cause. Of course one has to wonder if the treatment would even take in an alzheimers patient... or if the disease would block the new cells from integrating in the first place.
12/17/09
And if something like this did require routine maintenance how can the patient be expected to remember to do that?
12/18/09
If it is only a temporary fix? Then, no, it's not as good a solution as curing the underlying condition. But it's better than the no-solution-whatsoever we had previously. Needing regular treatment (say, every six months) sucks compared to being cured forever, but it does beat having your brain turn to swiss cheese. And if we do find a way to fix the underlying condition, it'll still be useful to have a way to reverse any initial damage that occurred before the disease was discovered.
Plus, this research doesn't claim to be the final word. It's a good first step, is all.
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
Mo.
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
The Brain: The same thing we do every night, Pinky. Try to take, er, I like Cheese...
12/17/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
SCIENCE TRIUMPHS OVER VAMPIRES YET AGAIN
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/15/09
12/16/09
12/15/09
And why would he deliberately cause an earthquake? Nobody wins in an earthquake, especially the guy who caused it. Odds are he'll end up falling into a fissure or being crushed by falling debris.
12/15/09
12/15/09
Someone ought to do something about this.
12/16/09
12/15/09
12/15/09