Showing posts with label being human. Show all posts
Showing posts with label being human. Show all posts

Happy Turkey Day!

Thursday, November 25, 2010 at 9:46 AM Bookmark and Share
There's a Turkey in my fridge waiting to be cooked, but I couldn't resist writing a quick post full of links on today's official bird. Enjoy!

On this blog

External Links

 

Do Night Shifts Cause Breast Cancer?

Sunday, October 31, 2010 at 11:34 PM Bookmark and Share
According to this review article, the answer appears to lie somewhere between maybe and probably.  While there seems to be a correlation between the two, more research is needed to determine whether or not there is a causal link as other plausible reasons for the correlation haven't yet been ruled out.
...Shift work. Excess incidence of breast cancer has been observed consistently in studies of women with prolonged exposure to shift work involving exposure to light at night (Kolstad 2008; Stevens 2009). Research needs in this area include a) a better definition of what is meant by shift work and related exposure metrics; b) studies of markers of circadian disruption in non–day workers; c) better descriptions of controls and their exposure to light at night; and d) investigation of the effect of variations in expression of circadian genes on cancer in shift workers. An emerging area of interest is the relative toxicity of occupational chemical exposure depending on time of day of that exposure. The marked circadian variations in cell division and DNA repair during the daily cycle are controlled by the circadian genes (Haus and Smolensky 2006; Stevens et al. 2007). Therefore, non–day workers may have very different susceptibility to occupational exposures compared with day workers. Studies are also needed to determine if shift work is associated with other cancers, especially hormonally related cancers, and prostate cancer in particular. If further experimental and epidemiologic evidence confirms a causal association between exposure to light at night and breast cancer, it will be important to develop interventions to reduce the risk.

You can read more here. For details, see the article and relevant references.

Reference

  1. Ward EM, Schulte PA, Straif K, Hopf NB, Caldwell JC, et al. 2010 Research Recommendations for Selected IARC-Classified Agents. Environ Health Perspect 118(10): doi:10.1289/ehp.0901828

    City Council Member to Gay Teens: "It Gets Better"

    Sunday, October 17, 2010 at 5:56 PM Bookmark and Share
    In the wake of multiple suicides among teens who are gay or perceived as gay, a single resounding message has emerged: "it gets better."

    Here's a particularly moving story from Ft. Worth city council member Joel Burns, told during a city council meeting earlier this month.


    More stories like Joel's need to be told, and the teens stuck in these seemingly hopeless situations need to hear them.  To help that happen, Dan Savage and his partner Terry started the It Gets Better Project which helps provide a platform for adults to share their own stories and tell their younger counterparts that they really can get through the bullying, they can get through school, and that it really does get better.

    You can see Dan and Terry's original video and the stories of others on the It Gets Better Project's YouTube channel. For additional resources, see the Trevor Project website, the Bullying Information Center, and resources for educators here and here.

    In which a family cheers at the suffering and death of an animal...

    Monday, September 27, 2010 at 12:15 AM Bookmark and Share
    Science is cold, emotionless.  It takes no moral positions, it has no fears, it's just a method for rooting out incorrect ideas by challenging those ideas with logic and data.  This is a good thing: it's what makes science so successful at giving us relatively objective descriptions of reality and how it works.

    But scientists aren't science.  They do hold moral position, and sometimes they give a damn about something. That means the things they care about - be it puppies, women's rights, great music, historical buildings, or hot shoes - these things evoke emotion, and dictate action. Personally, I'm rather partial to snakes, which is why my blood boils when I watch this video of a family cheering as passing traffic repeatedly hits and eventually kills an Eastern Diamondback Rattlesnake...


    Interestingly, I don't hate these people - I don't even dislike them (which I'll admit feels a bit odd - I feel like I should). Certainly, if I were in their shoes, I would have jumped out of the car and tried to saved the snake. But that's me - I know a fair bit about rattlesnakes, and through that knowledge I've developed a great deal of appreciation for them.

    That's important, so I'll reiterate: my knowledge of snakes has brought me to appreciate them. Science may be cold and emotionless, but the factual details it provides can significantly shape our morality - our sense of good and bad, right and wrong - and I think this is generally true for nearly everyone.  I'll let Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris elaborate (although see Massimo Piggliucci's commentary for a critique of Harris's talk)...




    So when I see videos like the first one above, I don't see an evil family of ruthless sadists raising sociopathic  children.  In fact, I'd be surprised if they weren't actually a rather likable and otherwise decent family.

    What I do see is a family that doesn't live near a good nature center. That doesn't spend much time at high quality zoos. That lives where the schools have ineffective biology teachers. A family with no pet reptiles, maybe no pets at all. Mom and dad are almost certainly not biologists, probably don't get out into nature much, and the kids probably don't want to become doctors or social workers or biologists (yet!).

    What I see is the target audience of every science and nature educator ever to speak to the public.

    Ignorance is the problem, education the solution.  

    The Internet = iDistraction™

    Wednesday, August 18, 2010 at 2:38 PM Bookmark and Share
    That's all.  I should get back to work now.

    Mid-week Reptilians #22: Why do snakes have scales?

    Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 12:27 AM Bookmark and Share
    Here's a quick video on why snakes (and other reptilians) evolved scales, including footage of some pretty sweet looking scaleless snakes.  At least watch the video up to around 3:23, then maybe consider some of the other videos on SnakeBytesTV.

    Disclaimer: I almost didn't post this video because of some aversive racism that sneaks in at the end -- but those scaleless snakes are just too awesome to not share! While I love the SnakeBytesTV videos and Brian seems like a stand-up guy, I think he made a big mistake showcasing that comment.  Was that really the best comment he could dig up?  If "mexican" were replaced with "black" would he still have aired it?  Replace "mexican" with "white" and you might see how pointless it is to even mention race there in the first place.

    Anyway, if the race thing has piqued your interest, you might find more to read elsewhere in the blogosphere.

    Monday Mammal #9: Marsh Rice Rat

    Monday, July 5, 2010 at 6:13 PM Bookmark and Share
    Many of this week's Monday Mammal, the Marsh Rice Rat (Oryzomys palustris), have likely perished recently as oil from the spill off of the Louisiana coastline has been recently been penetrating the coastal salt marshes.  Fortunately, these little rodents aren't limited to these coastal marshes (unlike some species), and should (as a species, at least) persist beyond the recent disaster.

    Figure 1:  "Oryzomys palustris - lower image is silvery subspecies O. p. argentatus of Florida Keys
    Credit: painting by Ron Klinger from Kays and Wilson's Mammals of North America,
    © Princeton University Press (2002)"  [Source]

    This rather broad ranging American native was first described in 1837 from a specimen taken in the north of their range in Salem Co. New Jersey.  They are semi-aquatic, mostly nocturnal omnivores and are found primarily in coastal (salt water) and interior (fresh water) marshes.  Like many (most?) other species, their distribution hasn't always been restricted to their current range.  Despite being endemic to the south eastern U.S. their ancestors likely trace back to central and South America.

    These rats belong to the subfamily Sigmodontinae, the South American rats and mice. While there is one other species of Oryzomys that makes it up into North America -- the Coues's Rice Rat (O. couesi) which occurs in southern Texas -- the other species in the genus Oryzomys all appear to occur further south.

    Oh, and here's one of those random facts you just don't find in species accounts any more -- just in case you were wondering how different these rats are from their domestic cousins. Unlike domestic rats, Marsh Rice Rats have 27 pairs of autosomal chromosomes plus two sex chromosomes for a grand total of 56 chromosomes...

    Hmm... this could make for a nice little pop quiz!  Do you know how many chromosomes do we humans have?

    Monday Mammal #6: The Gorilla

    Monday, May 24, 2010 at 7:57 PM Bookmark and Share
    Since gorillas seem to be popular lately, (see my recent post, this one from Laelaps and here in the news) I had little choice but to feature them as this week's Monday Mammal.  Below, I'll first introduce the different gorilla species (yes, there are more than one!) then cover where they fall in the list of our closest primate relatives.

    Figure 1. Adult male gorilla, Denver Zoo, 2009

     
    Figure 2. Hand of a female gorilla, napping at the Denver Zoo.
    While I doubt gorillas have ever wished they had our hairless, 
    fragile bodies I'm have to be suffering with major thumb envy!

    Gorillas are comprised of two species

    After reading this, you should donate $5-$10 to a good cause...

    Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 12:52 PM Bookmark and Share
    ... and here's why.

    Michael Strieb, recently diagnosed with ALS (Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, or Lou Gehrig’s Disease), needs our help so he can to continue to communicate with his family and friends.

    Here are more details, from Rebecca Watson via Skepchick blog:
    ... By the time he arrived at the Skepchick party at TAM 7 in Vegas last year, he was confined to a wheelchair and used a computer to do most of his communicating.

    Now he’s no longer able to speak or type. He’s an incredibly intelligent and kind person, and the world is better off when he can communicate. Now you can help him!

    For $3,200 he can afford an eye gaze system to communicate with his family and friends. Other skeptics are fundraising to help him out. We can totally hit that, seeing as about 10,000 of you are reading this right now. Send a few dollars their way and feel good about greatly improving the life of a fellow rational human.

    If we all pitch in a few bucks, $5, $10, $20, whatever you can spare, Michael will be back in touch with his loved ones in no time. A small price for such an invaluable gift.  Details on how you can help can be found here.

    For more details about Michael (or if you have problems with the online donation form) see the comments section of Rebecca's post, and this post by Phil Plait on Discover's Bad Astronomy blog.

    Amazing Story from Gorilla School

    Saturday, May 22, 2010 at 2:55 PM Bookmark and Share
    A brief "must watch" video of a Damian Aspinall's visit with a western lowland gorilla (G. g. gorilla) which he helped raise and reintroduce to the wild.  The video is part of the Animal Planet series Gorilla School

    "Damian Aspinall's Extraordinary Gorilla Encounter on Gorilla School"

    More about donating to help support gorilla conservation can be found at the Aspinall Foundation website, here or from other organizations such as the International Gorilla Conservation Programme, the Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund, and the Mountain Gorilla Conservation Fund.

    [Hat tip to Dr. Tom]

    Behold... the human brain!

    Thursday, January 21, 2010 at 12:47 AM Bookmark and Share
    Tonight, while sharing a late night bowl of ice cream, my wife and I happened upon the fourth episode of the Brain Series by Charlie Rose. It pretty much poked all my science-dork buttons, so I of course had to run right over to the computer and put up a post telling you to watch the series - it's cool stuff!!

    You can see all available episodes of the series here. The discussions cover some interesting and important topics. I'm already excited for next episode on brain development and child learning.

    I haven't watched them all yet, but the series seems to touch on a variety of topics related to what our brains do and how they do it. The format is the usual scene: a table full of experts moderated by Charlie Rose. If anything, it's a great chance to hear a handful of experts discussing some of the latest insights into common brain disorders like autism/ASD, schizophrenia, and depression. There is also a fair bit of discussion related to brain development during the first few years of life, which should be of interest to parents.

    For more info, check the links above and your local PBS listings.

    Why some love - or hate - Coriander

    Wednesday, March 11, 2009 at 1:05 AM Bookmark and Share
    Opinions are quite varied on whether adding fresh coriander (aka cilantro) to a recipe makes or breaks the dish. Some folks simply love the stuff while others find the herb quite repulsive - often noting a metallic, soapy or otherwise unpleasant flavor (other descriptions of the repulsive taste and/or smell can be found here) a description that seems quite different from how fans describe it. So why the disparity??

    Thanks to work by a few diligent and inquisitive scientists, we do know a few things about this love-hate relationship with one of my favorite herbs. Some these discoveries have been stumbled upon while working on more important issues while others come more focused and direct studies of the plant.

    Coriander (aka cilantro or Chinese parsely) is the common name of the plant Coriandrum sativum, a member of the carrot family Apiaceae or Umbelliferae. The young leaves are the herb called cilantro, while the older leaves and seeds are called coriander - although the herb is commonly referred to by both names. For some interesting Coriandrum chemistry, check out the chapter on the chemical properties of the herb starting on page 190 of Chemistry of Spices, available through Google Book Search. Unfortunately the book doesn't have much info on why some find the herb so revolting...

    So why the divide? According to work by folks like Charles Wysocki from the Monell Chemical Senses Center it seems there are very likely some genetic factors that contribute to the preference. This based on preliminary work comparing pairs of twins with non-twins - if its heritable, pairs of identical twins will share a preference more so than fraternal twins, with the lowest proportion of shared preferences seen between non-twin siblings.

    Initially some believed the cilantrophiles among us were unable to taste or smell some particularly offensive chemical found in the plant. This is a reasonable hypothesis, and is in line with similar phenomena such as the more common example involving asparagus (although I recently learned that producing and being able to smell the offending byproduct in this case are two separate issues).

    With cilantro, it turns out this notion is a bit off. There does seem to be a difference in smelling (and tasting) ability among the cilantro lovers and haters among us, but according to this essay by Josh Kurz on the NPR website, the smell some folks are missing out on is not a foul one, but that pungent lemony smell so adored by cilantro lovers. If you are among those who hate cilantro, you really might not know what you're missing!

    Given the descriptions I have heard and read, there may indeed be some other more unpleasant smells that are only detectable by the unfortunate few. This could simply be because the compounds that smell so good to some are themselves the culprits, being pleasant to some and repulsive to others. The GC anecdote in Josh Kurz's article suggests otherwise, however. So the two smells/tastes are indeed caused by two different chemicals. Unfortunately the essay doesn't mention whether or not researchers Wysocki and Preti were also able to smell the unpleasant compounds.

    Interestingly, this information doesn't show up on ihatecilantro.com!

    So will the world be a better place for knowing all this? Probably not, but I can already imagine someone slaving away for Monsanto trying to get rid of the repulsive compounds - after all, there is a big difference between "tastes bad" and "tasteless"!