Jun
12
In a recent post, I talked about the dangers of celebrities promoting pseudoscience. Well, maybe the celebrities have redeemed themselves. GQ featured a pictorial of scientists kicking it with rock stars such as Joe Perry and Sheryl Crow, aimed to raise public awareness of important medical and scientific research.
Not since will.i.am of the Black Eyed Peas appeared via hologram (seriously) to talk to CNN’s Anderson Cooper during the 2008 Presidential Election, has the rock & roll establishment nerded-out so much. But I applaud this effort to break down the stereotypes of scientists. Despite common misconceptions, we too have a sense of humor and can have fun. Enjoy.
Jun
11
There’s no way around it, smoking is bad for you. On top of the negative health effects, smoking also strains our economy. In fact, current estimates suggest $100 billion health care dollars could be saved each year by reducing the number of smokers. So to offer some food for thought for any smokers out there, I wanted to share some of my recent findings.
First, I came across some interesting statistics that I wanted to share (from Science Progress):
19.8 percent of adults in the United States (43.4 million people) were current smokers in 2007.
30 percent of all cancer deaths involve smoking as the primary cause.
443,000 people died prematurely every year as a result of smoking and exposure to tobacco smoke during the period between 2000 and 2004.
During that same period, smoking caused $98 billion in productivity losses each year.
For every person who dies of a smoking-related disease, 20 more people suffer with at least one serious illness from smoking.
20 percent of high school students were smokers in 2007.
3,600 people between the ages of 12 and 17 pick up smoking everyday.
I also found an interesting study that discussed the paradox of nicotine use: Users are thin and have low body fat, but are at an increased risk of cardiovascular disease. So what is it in cigarettes/nicotine that’s causing heart problems? A research group at Charles Drew University investigated the effects of giving nicotine to mice. Although the mice lost weight and ate less than the control animals, the nicotine-fed mice developed insulin resistance, which is a precursor to diabetes, and may explain the increased development of heart disease in nicotine users.
Jun
07
Two recent blogosphere topics revolve around celebrities handing out scientific advice. I want to be clear in this post, I’m a huge fan of citizen science, where the public invokes the scientific method to run their own series of experiments, and answer scientific questions for themselves. After all, science is not meant to be stuffed away in a lab, only attempted by rubber-gloved scientists in white lab coats. Science needs to live and breathe on our streets, in our schools, and in our backyards. But it bothers me when celebrities start dishing out anecdotal advice as “science-based”, when it’s simply based on isolated personal experiences. Such advice is not citizen science, but rather a ploy to gain media attention, boost ratings, or sell products and books. I want to highlight two excellent articles I came across — one that discusses the science that debunked the autism-vaccine controversy, the other on the danger of Oprah’s health advice.
Get the whole story »
May
21
There were two posts at ScienceDaily today that discussed the consequences of mothers’ choices during pregnancy on the future health of their children. The first stated that the children of mothers that smoked cigarettes during pregnancy were more likely to smoke in the future, and would find it harder to quit if they tried. The second discussed the link between obese pregnant mothers and children who developed asthma. Presumably, obesity causes a pro-inflammatory response, which may predispose the fetus to cytokines that cause respiratory inflammation that leads to the development of asthma in later life.
These posts have me thinking about just how much a mother’s life affects a fetus during pregnancy at the epigentic and developmental levels. In my preliminary search, I’ve found a couple other interesting stories. One article discussed how maternal feeding affects the biological clock of the fetus. Another report talked about how maternal exposure to bisphenol A (BPA) changes fetal gene expression.
Does anyone have any interesting links on this topic to share?
May
21
I think many of us assume that if experts say that Vitamin C can boost the immune system, then grabbing a 500mg bottle at your local health nutrition store must be a good idea. I know I’ve been guilty of this mindset. But it turns out that if you exercise, taking antioxidant vitamins might not be in your best interest. There was a good summary by Derek Lowe at ‘In The Pipeline’ about a new PNAS paper that argues against popping vitamins while engaged in an exercise routine. The study found that the experimental group that took a combination of Vitamin C and Vitamin E actually lost some of the inherent benefits of exercise, such as changes in insulin sensitivity and formation of natural antioxidants.
My only criticism of the study is that Vitamin C is capable of regenerating Vitamin E, so I wonder whether this phenomenon will carry through for all supplemental antioxidants, or if it’s limited to the particular vitamins used in this study.
I see a recurring theme in the articles that pique my interest these days, and I can’t help but wonder, yet again, if this is another example of the differences of nutrients that exist in nature, and those made in a lab? Should we be getting our vitamins from foods instead of supplemental pills?
May
14
Since the 1980’s, American soft drinks have been sweetened with high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), and it’s rapidly becoming the sweetener of choice in most processed foods. Critics are quick to point a finger at this enigmatic sugar as the root of all evil, claiming its empty calories are contributing to the obesity epidemic, and the numerous chemical processes needed to make it are simply “unnatural”. These accusations didn’t sit well with “King Corn”, and The Corn Refiners Association fired back with a series of TV commercials stating that HFCS was in fact natural, and completely safe in moderation. Government officials have been talking out of both sides of their mouths on the issue, first allowing HFCS to be called natural, then recently proposing it be taxed, thereby equating it to other unhealthy items, such as cigarettes. With all this conflicting information, what should the public think? Should we avoid HFCS at all costs? How does HFCS compare to other sugar sweeteners?
Get the whole story »
Apr
26
Just saw the news that the US Public Health Service has declared a public health emergency over outbreaks of swine flu in New York, California, and other states. Might be a good time to post a story I wrote for WIRED a few years ago about modeling pandemics, and various strategies devised at Los Alamos National Labs to contain such outbreaks.
The story begins with the story of the last major outbreak of swine flu in the U.S. - the 1976 non-epidemic out of Fort Dix, New Jersey. Though the anticipated pandemic never happened, the threat did prompt President Ford to declare an unprecedented nationwide immunization program.
The story contains both some lessons and some models for today’s outbreak. Here’s hoping it’s contained, and that Mexico can wage a successful campaign against the outbreak raging inside its borders.
Apr
24
A few weeks ago, I posted a summary of a few gadgets that tracked personal metrics (steps taken, sleep quality, etc.). I highlighted these particular devices because they took some of the hassle out of self-tracking by automating the process of collecting data and storing it in a personal database on the device’s website.
Following up on that post, I read an article at Technology Review today that talked about personal data monitors that interface directly with Microsoft’s electronic medical record system, Health Vault. Now, when you step on a scale or take your blood pressure (with compatible devices), your personal metrics will not only streamline to a single site, but will also associate with your health record, which will make this information easier to share and discuss with your physician.
The article says that interfacing personal health metrics with electroinc medical records is a step in the right direction, but it stil requires the user to physically “do” something (i.e. step on a scale, or take a blood pressure measurement). However, soon it may become easier for us to monitor our personal metrics, as a quote from the story says that in the future, “…Band-Aid-like sensors on the skin might monitor blood pressure or heart rate continuously”.
Apr
23
My first exposure to cells, DNA, and genetics was in the 4th grade. Our first assignment was to create a cell model, complete with organelles, a nucleus, and DNA, out of clay and candy. My gray-colored clay cytoplasm was laden with jellybean mitochondria, a licorice nucleus, and Tic Tacs to represent chromosomes. It was a modest simplification of the true wonders of our cells and genetic structure, but it was the highlight of the lesson. Although not at all to proper scale, and biologically unsustainable due to missing structures like M&M golgi bodies and a gummy worm endoplasmic reticulum (which ended up in my stomach instead of in the clay), the lesson brought biology to life for me.
So I was thrilled to hear the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) is participating in National DNA Day 2009 by reaching out to students across the country. Genetic counselors will talk to the kids about DNA, genetic testing, and the genetic counseling profession. Apparently our education system has come a long way on DNA education from its candy-model roots. With the advent of personal genomics upon us, it is crucial for the rising generation to understand what genetic screening is all about — and who better to present this information than NSGC members, who are the interface between genomic technology and its users.
A press release describing all of the efforts of the NSGC on DNA Day 2009 can be read here
Apr
22
A new Nature news story discusses the little known fact that there are two different types of adipose (fat) tissue: white and brown. White fat tissue stores excess calories that are not used for energy as lipids, and typically accumulates around the hips and thighs of the girls, and around the belly of the guys. Simply put, it’s the excess inches we try to get rid of through diet and exercise. Brown adipose tissue (BAT), on the other hand, typically accumulates around the collarbone, shoulder blade, and neck area. Originally thought to only be present in human newborns and animals, BAT is unique in that it burns excess fat calories, as opposed to storing them, to keep the body warm.
However, in recent studies published in The New England Journal of Medicine, researchers found metabolically active BAT in an unexpected place — on human adult volunteers. The studies used Positron Emission Tomography (PET), which measures where consumed radio-labeled glucose is metabolized in the body. Subjects were scanned either at room temperature, or in a cold room (17-19 deg Celsius), while their feet were repeatedly immersed in cold water (7-9 deg Celsius). It turns out that with the cold room and ice-cold foot bath, there was a significant increase in the metabolic activity of the fat tissue around the collarbone and shoulder blades, compared to scans taken at room temperature. Cold temperatures activate the sympathetic nervous system, and epinephrine (adrenaline) is released, which causes the body to warm itself. These results show that in colder temperatures, calories may not be stored on your waist or hips, but rather, metabolized by the brown adipose tissue to keep you warm.
Despite their findings, it’s not suggested you take your lunch and head for the nearest walk-in freezer. But the key finding is that BAT metabolism is triggered by adrenaline, the same hormone responsible for the “fight or flight” response. Therefore, these results open the possibility that new drugs that activate the sympathetic nervous system to release adrenaline may be a viable treatment for obesity.
