Posts Tagged ‘medicine’
“What’s in a name?”
Antidepressant use is on the rise in the U.S.– and with it, the proliferation of new mood-management drug names. At the same time, the Tech Right’s fascination with The Lord of the Rings, has occasioned a flood of company and product names drawn from that fantasy series. It can be very confusing, as a new game from the folks at Vercel demonstrates. Can you tell if a name is an antidressant drug or a Tolkien character?
* Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet (Act II, Scene II)
###
As we navigate nomenclature, we might recall that it was on this date in 1941 that first injection of penicillin into a patient was administered by physician Charles Fletcher at Radcliffe Infirmary in Oxford, England.
In 1928, Alexander Fleming had discovered the anitbacterial properties of the Penicillium mold. But he had little luck convincing his medical colleagues of its value: penicillin was so difficult to isolate that its development as a drug seemed impossible. After Fletcher’s experiment and others– all of which showed promise, but “failed” when the doctors ran out of penicillin– Fleming used the hospital’s entire supply of penicillin to cure a patient of an infection of the nervous system (streptococcal meningitis) which would otherwise have been fatal. Having established medical efficacy, the doctors were able to convince labs in the U.K and the U.S. to pursue large-scale fermentation of the mold and refinments in its medical form. By June 1942, just enough US penicillin was available to treat ten patients. But with the U.S. entry into World War II, the War Production Board undertook to make penicillin available to fighting forces across the conflict. By June, 1945, over 646 billion units per year were being produced.
“In the natural world, anything that is colored so brightly must be some kind of serious evolutionary badass”*…
There are an estimated 10 quintillion (10,000,000,000,000,000,000) individual insects alive on earth today; they’ve been around for over 350 million years and ihabit nearly every environment, from deserts to snowy mountains. Their total biomass is massive, estimated to be around 70 times more than all humans combined. Often considered pests, only about 3% of species are harmful to humans; the vast majority are crucial for pollination, decomposition, and as food sources for other animals. (More insect data.)
“Loren” (and here) is a microbiologist fascinated by bugs– and ready to share…
I am incredibly fond of insects. They’re small and usually pretty fast, so it’s rewarding to successfully capture a photo of one. from 2017 to 2023, I was fairly consistent about chasing down bugs and sharing the photos on instagram, but sticking them all in a square grid can only do so much for me (or you). Here, I want to have a little more fun with my photos, and share other bug-related things that I like. There’s a lot! I am not an entomologist, merely a bug fan, so this page in its current state skews more towards the entertaining than the informative, but who knows what it may turn into. Right now there’s an entomology textbook sitting on my coffee table, and plenty of time to read it while the bugs overwinter…
Browse and learn: “The Bug Zone,” via Matt Muir (@mattmuir.bsky.social) and his always-illuminating Web Curios (@curiobot.bsky.social).
* Neal Stephenson, Cryptonomicon
###
As we creep and crawl, we might spare a thought for a man concerned with “bugs” of a different sort, Joseph Lister (1st Baron Lister, OM, PC, FRS, FRCSE, FRCPGlas, FRCS); he died on this date in 1912. A surgeon, medical scientist, and experimental pathologist, he was a pioneer of antiseptic surgery and preventive healthcare. Just as John Hunter revolutionised the science of surgery, Lister’s revolutionized the craft of surgery.
Lister researched the role of inflammation and tissue perfusion in the healing of wounds, and advanced diagnostic science by analysing specimens using microscopes. But his biggest contributions were a function of his application of Louis Pasteur‘s then-novel germ theory. Lister introduced carbolic acid (modern-day phenol) as a steriliser for surgical instruments, patients’ skins, sutures, surgeons’ hands, and wards, promoting the principle of antiseptics. And he devised strategies to increase the chances of survival after surgery by reducing post-operative infections (e.g., segragating post-op patients from pre-op patients who had germ-riddled wounds).
“The vast majority of terrestrial species are in fact microbes, and scientists have only begun scratching the surface of the microbial realm. It is entirely possible that examples of life as we don’t know it have so far been overlooked.”*…
Not only do we continue to find surprising new forms of microbial life, some of them challenge our very defintion of “life.” Alice Sun reports…
Scientists recently discovered a microbe with one of the tiniest genomes on Earth. More surprising, the creature is almost entirely dependent on its host: Its genes don’t support any of the functions of metabolism, one of the key processes of life. As such, it challenges fundamental notions of what it means to be a living organism. The discovery was “pure serendipity,” says Takuro Nakayama, an evolutionary microbiologist at the University of Tsukuba in Japan. Takayama wanted to study the many microbes that live within a single-celled marine dinoflagellate, Citharistes regius, a kind of plankton. But when he and his colleagues sequenced the genes of this microbial community, they kept turning up tiny, odd chunks of DNA.
It turns out that these DNA chunks belong to some unusual archaea—a branch on the tree of life populated by single-celled microbes that can often survive in extreme environments. (Archaea are similar to bacteria, but distinct in their structure, genetics, and metabolism.)
Nakayama and his colleagues proposed the name Sukunaarchaeum mirabile for the newly-discovered microbe: Sukunaarchaeum after the Japanese dwarf deity Sukuna-biko-na, and mirabile for marvelous. At only 238,000 base pairs, the number of genes in the DNA of Sukunaarchaeum is smaller than that of any other known archaea. The scientists described their finding in a bioRxiv preprint earlier this year.
So how did Sukunaarchaeum end up with such a strikingly tiny genome? Over the course of evolution, genetic instructions for life often become increasingly complex. But evolution can also go in the other direction, leading to greater simplicity in the genome. This so-called genomic reduction, where organisms end up with fewer genes than their ancestors, is typically observed in the domains of bacteria and archaea. What struck Nakayama and his colleagues about Sukunaarchaeum was the extent of reduction and specialization in its genes.
With its stripped down genome, Sukunaarchaeum appears to be completely dependent on its host, C. regius, for essential energy and nutrients. “It likely cannot produce its own cellular building blocks,” notes Nakayama. “No previously discovered microbe has shown such an extreme degree of metabolic dependence.”
Sukunaarchaeum seems to almost inhabit a new category of life, suspended somewhere between archaea and virus. It is like viruses—which aren’t typically considered to be “alive”—in that it has a tiny genome and is totally dependent on its host for metabolism. But unlike a virus, Sukunaarchaeum has its own ribosomes, cellular structures that synthesize proteins, and it can replicate itself without the help of a host.
To get a sense of just how unusual Sukunaarchaeum is, the researchers decided to scan the oceans for potential relatives. They analyzed environmental genetic sequence data from marine environments all over the world, focusing on spots where C. regius is known to live. Using a database called the Tara Oceans project, they discovered a vast array of sequences that are comparable to that of Sukunaarchaeum, which they hypothesize could represent a new, deeply branching archaeal lineage.
For Nakayama, this additional finding suggests that many more microbes that challenge the definition of life may be out there, living in what Nakayama calls “microbial dark matter,” or microbes that can’t be cultivated in the lab. “The extreme, virus-like lifestyle we hypothesize for Sukunaarchaeum is a perfect example of the surprising outcomes found in this ‘natural laboratory of evolution,’” he says.
Mart Krupovic, a virologist and microbiologist at Institut Pasteur in France who wasn’t involved in the study, called the finding “remarkable.” Krupovic has studied giant viruses that, like Sukunaarchaeum, defy categorization. These giant viruses have evolved larger and more complex genomes that include some of the genes for DNA translation, a characteristic thought to be reserved for cellular life. “I think that is fascinating,” says Krupovic, “how little we still know about the world which surrounds us.”…
How did Sukunaarchaeum end up with such a strikingly tiny genome? “A Rogue New Life Form,” from @alicesunreports.bsky.social in @nautil.us.
See also; “Candidatus Sukunaarchaeum Mirabile Is A Novel Archaeon With An Unprecedentedly Small Genome” (source of the image at the top).
The BioRxiv preprint is here.
###
As we look again at “living,” we might spare a thought for Robert Huebner; he died on this date in 1998. A physician and virologist, his research into viruses, their causes, and treatment led to his breakthrough insights into the connections between viruses and cancer, which have led to new treatments. His hypothesized oncogene was discovered to be a trigger for normal cells turning cancerous.
“Nanotechnology is an idea that most people simply didn’t believe”*…
Indeed, in the 1980s, even as nanotech pioneer Erik Drexler, a graduate student at MIT at the time, was doing the early work of defining and charting a course for the nascent field, MIT’s departments of electric engineering and computer science refused to approve his Ph.D. topic and plan of study (though ultimately the Media Lab did, and Erik earned his doctorate).
Today the reality– and centrality– of the field are only too apparent and have become the subject of trade and industrial policy… because while the U.S. led in the development of nanotech science, it lags in manufacturing and commercialization. In an excerpt from their book Industrial Policy for the United States: Winning the Competition for Good Jobs and High-Value Industries, Ian Fletcher and Marc Fasteau explain…
Nanotechnology is the manipulation of matter at scales from a fraction of a nanometer to a few hundred nanometers — sizes between individual atoms and small single-celled organisms — at which it has radically different properties. Nanotech is already significant in many industries. Integrated circuits are a form of nanotech. Other nanotech provides the light, strong composites in aircraft and space vehicles. Still other nanotech powers the solid-state lasers used to transmit information through the internet and the light-emitting diodes in LED light bulbs and flat-screen TVs. Nanotech also makes possible solar cells, the batteries in electric cars, and medical technologies such as vaccines. It is thus the unifying thread of many of today’s most advanced technologies. Unfortunately, America is falling behind.
In the future, nanotech-based quantum computing and communications will lead to more powerful computers, transforming national security and internet commerce by making currently secret communications insecure. Medical nanotechnologies will permit targeted interventions at the cellular level, providing new weapons against diseases, biological weapons, and defenses against them. China is known to be working on these.
Much of the science underpinning these advances was developed at firms and universities in the US. But the huge manufacturing industries built on it are mostly overseas. For example, the organic light-emitting diode (OLED) technology Kodak created didn’t save that firm from going bankrupt in 2012. But it did enable lucrative businesses for Korea’s Samsung, to whom Kodak licensed the technology, and LG, which bought Kodak’s entire OLED business in 2009. Today, American firms like Nanosys and Universal Display develop important nanotechnologies, but do not actually manufacture the end products and are thus relatively small.
How did the US get itself into this situation? A major government program, the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI), has been funded since 2001, but Washington failed to appreciate the importance of having both a technology and a manufacturing strategy. The prevailing wisdom was that if the academic science was supported, mass manufacturing would follow automatically. By contrast, successful rival nations in nanotech have focused on making these technologies manufacturable at scale, employing every policy tool from R&D subsidies to cheap capital to tariffs. A 2020 National Academies review of the NNI urged that the US recognize that ‘the recent, focused, and in some cases novel commercialization approaches of other nations may be yielding better societal outcomes.’…
A little wonky, but both fascinating and important: “Nanotechnology,” via the invaluable Delanceyplace.com.
(Image above: source)
###
As we get small, we might send miniscule birthday greetings to a man who whose work has contributed to the development of medical applications of nanotech: Bert Sakmann; he was born on this date in 1942. A cell physiologist, he shared the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine (with Erwin Neher) in 1991 for their work on “the function of single ion channels in cells”– work made possible in part by their invention of the patch clamp.
“Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health is the most shocking and inhumane”*…
We tend to encounter data about public health in the form of averages over the population as a whole. But as a recent study published in The Lancet painfully demonstrates, the underlying reality is much more complicated– and alarming…
The differences in U.S. life expectancy are so large it’s as if the population lives in separate Americas instead of one.
Nearly two decades ago, a team of researchers published the landmark “Eight Americas” study, which examined drivers of U.S. health inequities between 1982 and 2001 by dividing the U.S. population into groups based on geography, race, income, and other factors.
A new research study, published this month by the University of Washington and the Council on Foreign Relations, revisits that landmark research project, adding two new “Americas” to account for Latino populations.
This new study finds that U.S. life expectancy disparities have grown over the last two decades between 2001 and 2021, with the differences between the best and worst of those “Americas” increasing from 12.6 years in 2000 to 20.4 years in 2021. COVID-19 exacerbated this divide, but gaps in longevity had already been growing before the pandemic hit…
“The 10 Americas: How Geography, Race, and Income Shape U.S. Life Expectancy,” from @thinkglobalhealth.org. Both this summary article and the underlying paper are eminently worth reading in full.
* Martin Luther King, Jr.
###
As we unpack unfairness, we might send preventative birthday greetings to Ernst Wynder; he was born on this date in 1922. An epidemiologist and public health researcher, he is best remembered for his pioneering work in identifying the link (in 1950) between smoking and lung cancer.
Wynder devoted his career to the study and prevention of cancer and chronic disease, publishing hundreds of scientific papers. Through the 1950s and 1960s, he worked at Sloan-Kettering Institute for Cancer Research. In 1969, he founded the American Health Foundation. In 1972, he founded the academic journal Preventive Medicine and served as the founding editor.
You must be logged in to post a comment.