Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Some People (Score 0) 728

You, sir, are an idiot. Let's say someone exploits this and blows up a flight somewhere. Or, they manage to hijack the plane and fly it into some building (the how is irrelevant). I don't see any of the people killed by the collateral damage opting out of getting killed.

Comment What about ATP? (Score 1) 405

Phosphorus (or more precisely, phosphate) is used to form the covalent linkages between nucleotide bases in DNA and RNA. You could, in theory, retain the Watson-Crick basepairing of G, A, T, and C while replacing phosphate with something else such as arsenic. That is to say, the nucleotide bases are the bits of information, whereas the phosphate just holds it all together. To use a computer analogy, data is data, whether you store it on a hard drive or a flash drive.

What intrigues me more, is what about ATP? Adenosine triphosphate is not only used for making RNA, but it's also the universal common energy currency for almost all enzymes in all known organisms that catalyze endothermic reactions. If phosphate is not used in this arsenic-based organism, do they still use ATP as an energy source, and if not, what does it use and what kinds of adaptations does it enzymes have to accomodate this?

Comment RNA editing has been known for a long time (Score 1) 196

That mRNAs are edited post-transcriptionally has been known for some time now. In mammals, RNA modifying enzymes will act on specific mRNAs to alter their base structures, thereby changing their amino acid encoding. (too tired right now to provide a link, but this happens for mRNAs coding for AMPA-class glutamate-gated ion channels). It's not so much that it happens per se that is amazing; its that it happens at this large scale.

Much of this stuff is based on nex-gen high throughput sequencing technology, which has emerged just in the past 3-4 years or so. Very cool stuff.

Comment ebooks (and e-music) suck (Score 1) 437

why would I want to buy books and music that is tied to either a particular hardware platform and/or DRM scheme, at or above (or even near) cost of the physical media? Whenever possible I buy CDs or dead tree edition books. Occasionally I have bought DRM-free tracks from Amazon (I don't want to buy iTunes tracks because even though you can get DRM-free stuff from there it's inconvenient to move things between different devices), but overall I prefer physical media, which I can chose to sell later in the second-hand market if I so choose.

Its the same deal with e-textbooks. I teach university-level biology, and when the publisher is asking $100 for the e-book and $120 for the hardcopy, how can I recommend the ebook in good faith, especially when the publisher even outsources their DRM technology?

Comment blame it partly on the procurement process (Score 2, Insightful) 367

I don't know about other states, but in CA once money is earmarked for construction (many times it's so-called "one-time" money, or money that came from a one time windfall), one is prohibited from using it for any other purpose. For instance, at my daughter's school district, the new annex just completed this year at the district office has leather couches, mahoghany accent tables, and marble floors in their reception area. All the money for the construction of this annex was earmarked years ago, when the economy was still "strong". Despite the fact that the actual monetary needs of the district are elsewhere (teachers anyone?), they cannot use the money for anything else, even though it would have made much more sense to go with cheaper materials and use the surplus from construction to fund instruction.

Comment the summary is wrong (Score 4, Informative) 125

On a research grade light microscope, the maximum magnification one can get without loss of resolution is roughly 1500x - 1600x, not 400x as the summary suggests. Also, resolution of the image has nothing to do with magnification; the numerical aperture (N.A.) of the objective lens determines the resolution.

Comment Re:Where are we with Viral Immortality? (Score 2, Insightful) 187

no, engineered viruses are nowhere near that advanced. Most viruses are limited by payload; there is a limit to how much DNA (or RNA) you can engineer into a viral particle. (not unlike a BIOS virus I suppose). Also, the viruses that are able to modify the host genome do so at random locations, so it is hard to precisely control where you want a particular modification to occur. And, the virus only modifies a very small portion of the host genome. Finally, most viruses are highly picky as to what kinds of cells they will infect. For instance, HIV will only target helper T cells in the immune system. Engineering HIV to, for instance, infect cytotoxic T cells (another type of white blood cell that is similar but distinct) will never work, because as far as HIV is concerned a cytotoxic T cell is no different than a kidney cell (that is, it's not a helper T cell).

Comment Re:old news (Score 1) 187

I agree that the article makes it sound recent and I got misled too before reading TFA.
But can you explain why you differentiate between cell aging and human aging? Isn't human aging a consequence of cell aging?

cell aging is different than organism aging. Cells, by and large, are cheap to produce and are expendable. You produce cells via binary cell division; one cell becomes two new cells. However, most cell lineages can divide only a finite number of times. When cells from a lineage have undergone a certain number of divisions, they lose the ability to divide further. This is what is generally meant by "aged cells". Of course, each cell has a limited useful lifespan as well. Some cells (red blood cells) only last a few months, whereas others (neurons) last a lifetime. But whereas it is easy to replace a RBC (because of stem cells that do not have a limited number of cell divisions), it is somewhat harder to replace a neuron.

The number of times a cell can divide is limited by how long telomeres are. Each time a cell divides, its telomeres get shorter. The cell has mechanisms in place that measures telomere length. Once they are below a certain threshold, cell division stops. This is because (for reasons too detailed to get into here) sufficiently long telomeres are essential for replication of chromosome ends. Without such long telomeres, chromosome ends would fail to replicate. Normal cells do not express active telomerase, the enzyme needed to maintain telomere length during DNA replication. Stem cells and cancer cells have active telomerase.

Biotech

Submission + - Cancer docs gets death threat over drug approval (psa-rising.com)

nbauman writes: "Two oncologists got death threats from angry prostate cancer patients because they voted, as members of the Food and Drug Administration's drug approval panel, to delay approval of a new cancer drug. http://psa-rising.com/blog/index.php/2007/06/03/pr ostate-cancer-doctor-receives-death-threat-over-pr ovenge#more-325 The issue is rigorous science vs. immediate access. Howard I. Scher and Maha Hussain said that the studies of Provenge, a prostate cancer vaccine, done by manufacturer, Dendreon Corp., didn't show improved survival. After the FDA studies were done, supporters of the drug went back and found ways of interpreting the data that did show an advantage, which sometimes came out to 4 1/2 months longer survival depending on how you look at it. Critics say they're data-dredging evidence selectively to make the drug look good. http://psa-rising.com/blog/index.php/2007/04/17/sc her-to-fda-about-provenge-hearing An ongoing 500-patient study will give the answer — in 2 years. Prostate cancer patients say they'll be dead by then, they have nothing to lose, and they have a right to use a new drug now. "We want Provenge to work; that's our raison d'etre," Scher said, but in order to know whether it works, they need to complete the study. Paul Goldberg, editor of The Cancer Letter, said that basing decisions on reliable evidence is also "patient advocacy. This is just another form of it through science." http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2007/05/10/cancer-vacc ine-activists-unhappy-but-unbowed/ Usually unmentioned is the question of who should pay for the treatment. The FDA would let Dendreon give the vaccine to cancer patients now as "compassionate use," but Dendreon says it would be too expensive. Cancer patients want it to be approved so Dendreon can sell it normally and insurance companies (and Medicare) will pay for it."

Slashdot Top Deals

If you want to put yourself on the map, publish your own map.

Working...