Also, while this is on my mind. In my master’s-level food toxicology class today we discussed various genetically modified crops and watched part of a documentary about them, and as someone with a food science degree I would like to be clear about the following:
The only health risk that has been shown to us throughout twenty plus years of having genetically modified crops as part of the food system is that there is a possibility of introducing proteins that could cause allergic reactions. New strains are required to be tested for this, of course, but that is a practical risk that needs to be closely monitored.
The objection to GM in general should be the patenting of genes and other legal matters; there are a number of crops that have been saved from blight and overall extinction via modification in the past two decades, and much like putting up inaccessibly expensive paywalls to scientific journals, patenting of genes within crops limits our ability within universities, small research companies, etc to make significant breakthroughs to further the scientific progress of humanity.
Furthermore. People think of organic crops as the environmentally-friendly option. If you believe this, please pay attention to what I’m about to say. Current regulations dictate that to have a crop classified as organic the land on which the crop is grown has to have been pesticide-free for a significant amount of time. There is no interim label available to farmers. So what do they do? Do they use no pesticides and take the losses from disease and insects for a decade, waiting for a time in which they are allowed to reclassify their crops in such a way that they can sell them for more money?
Of course they don’t. It isn’t practical. You can say what you like about how the system is structured; I’d personally like to see an interim classification come into play. But what farmers actually do, and states like Montana are feeling the full effects of this–they clear-cut forests and plant their organic crops on entirely new land.
You want to tell me that clear-cutting forests is environmentally friendly? It’s not. Hell, for all that people make a big deal about saving the environment by limiting how much paper they use, paper production is done in a more sustainable manner (because the paper farms replant their trees in a regular cycle so as to not deplete their sources; they don’t just go out and cut down random trees).
There are objections to be had in regards to GM crops on a legal basis. On a scientific one, there isn’t much. Call them frankenfoods all you want; look up what most commercially-sold produce truly looks like in the wild with no modification and you will learn very quickly that all foods have been modified in some way over the years through conventional breeding. We just think of that differently.
Biotechnology is not the enemy. Pseudoscience tells us that this is the case. Pseudoscience also tells us that we should seek out natural supplements instead of medicine, and, well… that’s a rant for another day, but suffice to say it’s an even more dubious proposition.
Don’t buy into it.
“Here is something a little different! I work in a lab at a large hospital, so we see some interesting things. A coworker of mine collected these urines to make a “pee rainbow.” It only took a few days before we had our full spectrum of color. :) It was then requested that I bring my camera to work and document this endeavor.”
Wind tunnel testing plays a major role in the planning of many space missions. Here a model of the Mars Sample Return Orbiter is tested at Mach 10 to determine the heat shield’s response to aerobraking off Mars’ atmosphere. The colors are the result of electron beam fluorescence, in which an electron gun is used to ionize molecules in the flow, which causes them to emit photons (light). The technique can be used for flow visualization–as in the case of the shock waves shown here–or to measure flow characteristics like density, temperature, and velocity. (Photo credit: Thierry Pot/DAFE/ONERA)
Researchers at the University of Birmingham have shown how the development of coated silica nanoparticles could be used in restorative treatment of sensitive teeth and preventing the onset of tooth decay.
The study, published in the Journal of Dentistry, shows how sub-micron silica particles can be prepared to deliver important compounds into damaged teeth through tubules in the dentine.
The tiny particles can be bound to compounds ranging from calcium tooth building materials to antimicrobials that prevent infection.
Professor Damien Walmsley, from the School of Dentistry at the University of Birmingham, explained, “The dentine of our teeth have numerous microscopic holes, which are the entrances to tubules that run through to the nerve. When your outer enamel is breached, the exposure of these tubules is really noticeable. If you drink something cold, you can feel the sensitivity in your teeth because these tubules run directly through to the nerve and the soft tissue of the tooth.”
“Our plan was to use target those same tubules with a multifunctional agent that can help repair and restore the tooth, while protecting it against further infection that could penetrate the pulp and cause irreversible damage.”
The aim of restorative agents is to increase the mineral content of both the enamel and dentine, with the particles acting like seeds for further growth that would close the tubules.
Previous attempts have used compounds of calcium fluoride, combinations of carbonate-hydroxypatite nanocrystals and bioactive glass, but all have seen limited success as they are liable to aggregate on delivery to the tubules. This prevents them from being able to enter the opening which is only 1 to 4 microns in width.
However, the Birmingham team turned to sub-micron silica particles that had been prepared with a surface coating to reduce the chance of aggregation.
When observed using high definition SEM (Scanning Electron Microsopy), the researchers saw promising signs that suggested that the aggregation obstacle had been overcome.
Professor Zoe Pikramenou, from the School of Chemistry at the University of Birmingham, said, “These silica particles are available in a range of sizes, from nanometre to sub-micron, without altering their porous nature. It is this that makes them an ideal container for calcium based compounds to restore the teeth, and antibacterial compounds to protect them. All we needed to do was find the right way of coating them to get them to their target. We have found that different coatings does change the way that they interact with the tooth surface.”
“We tested a number of different options to see which would allow for the highest level particle penetration into the tubules, and identified a hydrophobic surface coating that provides real hope for the development of an effective agent.”
Our next steps are to optimise the coatings and then see how effective the particles are blocking the communication with the inside of the tooth. The ultimate aim is to provide relief from the pain of sensitivity.
University of Birmingham
Nanotechnology World Association
Also because of that whole "tests unproven research on himself without respect to lab safety protocol" thing
SCIENCE… TOO STRESSFUL FOR HULK… HULK NEED HUG…
We take for granted that drops which impact a solid surface will splash, but, in fact, drops only splash when the surrounding air pressure is high enough. When the air pressure is low enough, drops simply impact and spread, regardless of the fluid, drop height, or surface roughness. Why this is and what role the surrounding air plays remains unclear. Here researchers visualize the air flow around a droplet impact. In (a) we see the approaching drop and the air it pulls with it. Upon impact in (b) and © the drop spreads and flattens while a crown of air rises in its wake. The drop’s spread initiates a vortex ring that is pinned to the drop’s edge. In later times (d)-(f) the vortex ring detaches from the drop and rolls up. (Photo credit: I. Bischofberger et al.)