Rats with spinal injury get control of their bladders back.

Scientists in America have made breakthrough in repairing the damaged spinal cords of rats. 

Somewhere in a lab in America right now, every single day is dedicated to giving rats control of their bladders. Some people might look at that and think that their work is unimportant, but in actuality, they couldn’t be farther from the truth.

Let me explain. For decades now labs across the world have transplanted nerve cells into paralysed animals in an attempt to return some of their function by connecting two areas of disconnected spinal cord. However, trying to get these cells to connect to each other has proved difficult, mainly due to the scar tissue which forms on damaged tissue which prevents cellular regeneration.

That is, until now. Successful results have now been gained from scientists in America who have performed excruciatingly complex surgery on paralysed rats to transplant nerves to fix the gap in their spinal cord. This, in combination with a cocktail of injections and chemicals which breaks down scar tissue and encourages cellular growth, has resulted in injured nerve cells kick starting their own growth for the very first time.

As you can tell from the title of this post, the rats didn’t miraculously jump up and start dancing about. However, what they did do is regain control of their bladder. Whilst on its own that might not seem like much, when you consider what this breakthrough means for future studies, the knock on effect could be astronomical, giving paralysed patients back a piece of their dignity.

The next step in this research will be recreating this technique in larger and larger animals, without any sign of negative side effects, until eventually it can be used on humans.

Write below with your comments and questions, and sign up to the mailing list at the top of this page to get notifications  of whenever I leave a post. 

It takes three to tango.

The UK has become the first country to back using the DNA from three different individuals during IVF to produce one healthy baby. But could it be crossing an important ethical line?

Later this year regulations will be drafted in the UK which will allow a three-person IVF to be legalized. This three-way IVF could be an important measure for preventing fatal mitochondrial diseases from being passed on from mother to child. Now here's where it gets complicated, so let me try and explain. 

As most of us should know, during fertilization the male sperm joins with the female egg. This means that the genetic information that a child contains should be split 50:50 between their mother and their father. However, the mother also contributes something else to their child; their mitochondria. Mitochondria are tiny organelles within each of our cells and are considered the 'energy factories' that give our body energy. These mitochondria contain their own DNA which differs from the rest of the cell. It is this DNA within the mitochondria which can be passed on to the embryo, and if this DNA is defective, the embryo is starved from the crucial energy it needs which in severe cases can cause death. 

The problem of defective mitochondrial DNA is more common than you might think, with 1 in every 6,500 babies born affected. With this treatment, the DNA from the father can join with the DNA of the mother, but with the mitochondrial DNA coming from a third partner. This would lead to a child being born that has inherited most of its DNA from its parents, but a tiny amount from a third party. 

The logistics of this involves fertilizing two eggs with the same sperm, one from the mother, and one from a donor. This would leave two fertilized cells, one with defective mitochondria, and the other with healthy mitochondria. At this point, the nucleus from the mother would be removed from it's defective cellular environment and be placed into the fertilized healthy mitochondrial cell, which has also had it's nucleus removed. 

This treatment will allow numerous families to have healthy children who would have previously been unable to. 

Many would think that the only ethical thing to do at this time would be to introduce this life saving treatment globally, to help those who are in the biggest need of it. However, there are others within the community who believe that this treatment may cross the ethical line. They believe that this puts us on a slippery slope towards producing designer babies, and that this treatment will have an impact on future generations, who will inherit this mixmatch of DNA. 

Do you approve of the UK's actions? Or do you think this research should be banned under ethical issues? Write below with your comments or questions and sign up for email notifications of every time i publish a post. 

Mouse cloned from a drop of blood. Will it be us next?

Scientists in Japan have dramatically advanced their field by successfully cloning a mouse from only a single drop of blood. 

Every time a new story is released about cloning we all tend to get a little bit excited. We've all grown up watching films set in some distant future where humans are cloned willy nilly, and we've all day dreamed about how different our lives would be if we had a clone to do all our chores for us. 

Well this latest development is just another step forward in our path towards making human cloning a reality. For the first time, circulating blood cells from the tail of a donor mouse have been used to produce a clone of that mouse. 

Now, this isn't the first time that this sort of thing has happened, with clones previously being grown from white blood cells taken from the bone marrow and the liver. However, this is the first time that a clone has been produced with such ease, from a sample of cells that can be so easily extracted. 

The immediate benefit of this is that important genetic strains of mice can now be easily maintained and duplicated, to prevent the loss of important genetic information. This research will also allow for the large-scale production of animals that are considered of a 'high quality'. For example, if one cow produces much more milk than all the other cows, we can now take a sample of blood from that cow and produce an infinite number of clones, all of whom also produce a large quantity of milk.

However, this sort of thing could have been done before. This research has only managed to make these procedures a bit easier.  The main area of impact this will have is on the conservation of endangered species, from which only a small tissue sample is available. This means that we will be able to produce a population of an endangered species that are all clones of each other, who will then be able to produce more young in a more natural way. Whilst this may seem worse than incestuous, i think we can all agree it's still better than extinction.  

Whilst I wish I could be writing; 'Human cloning is now a reality!'... I can't. But that doesn't mean that it's never going to happen. In fact, keep up to date with this blog and you never know, you could be reading those words in less time than you think. 

For the full article go to this link: http://www.biolreprod.org/content/early/2013/06/25/biolreprod.113.110098.abstract

Write below with your comments and questions, and sign up to the mailing list at the top of this page to get notifications of whenever I leave a post. 

Being able to throw has allowed us to take over the world.

Hominids learnt how to throw around two million years ago, a skill which heavily influences much of what we are today.

You can go and look at any sport stadium across the world and you'll be able to witness humans incredible ability to throw. Especially when compared to our relatives the chimpanzees who can only throw at around 20mph against our speedy 90mph. This has lead many people to question how this ability evolved, and more importantly, why. 

Recent investigations into the fossils of our earliest ancestors show that Homo erectus underwent anatomical changes during its evolution which gave it its ability to throw. It might not seem much to us now, in a world where we mainly throw around balls or our mobile phones, but two million years ago being able to throw would have been the difference between life or death.

To try and understand this evolutionary development, researchers first looked at how humans throw today. They did this by recording a sample of athletes using motion capture cameras, with particular focus on their shoulders. This showed that the many ligaments and tendons that are involved in the movement of the shoulder are able to store a large amount of elastic energy, which can be released and used to force a projectile through the air. It would have been this ability to store elastic energy that would have put Homo erectus apart from Homo habilis and allowed it to throw at great speed.

Unlike other animals with large claws and teeth, humans have no natural weapons, and so required other methods of attack and defence. The ability to throw would have been an important step in our evolution, as it allowed us to defend ourselves against predators, as well as become predators ourselves. This change in diet to containing energy rich meat would have in turn also allowed for further changes in our biology, giving us the much larger bodies and brains that we have today.

It has also been suggested that this change in diet led to the division in labour between hunter and gatherers. This would have promoted a much more complex social hierarchy between the individuals of the group, a hierarchy that can still be seen in us humans today.

This hunting behaviour would have also been a deciding factor in our migration into new environments, which, without the ability to hunt, would not have previously been able to sustain our vegetarian lifestyles. These are all big parts of what makes us human, and just goes to show how one small adaptation could influence an entire organism’s future.

However, as is always the case with this kind of research, there are those who dispute the above findings. Susan Larson, whose work also focuses on shoulder anatomies has suggested that the above conclusions may have been drawn from an over interpretation of fossil evidence. She suggests that Homo erectus was not necessarily a very good thrower when compared with modern day human athletes, but rather a change in their anatomy gave them a much larger range of movements which would have allowed them to manipulate their environment more successfully.

There is always going to be dispute in this type of research, as very little is based on good solid fact, with most theories being developed and built up from one single piece of information.

However, what cannot be disputed is the importance of our ability to throw. Without being able to throw weapons we would not have been able to hunt, which would have prevented us evolving our large bodies and enormous brains, as well as stopping us from venturing into new environments and developing our complex social hierarchy.

So, next time you’re throwing something around, whether it be a ball or an inanimate object that’s annoyed you, think about the millions of years of evolution that’s gone into it, and try and appreciate it that little bit more.

What’s the best thing you’ve ever thrown around? Will this research influence how you think about chucking stuff about? Write below with comments or questions. 

If you'd like to read the full article published in nature, follow the link below:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v498/n7455/full/nature12267.html

Getting a glimpse into the future might just be the thing that smokers need to quit.

A new computer game has been developed by researchers which has allowed its players to see how they might look in 20 years if they were to carry on smoking.

Smoking, and the diseases related to it, is one of the biggest killers across the world. It might seem strange to some non-smokers that smokers would put themselves through that risk on a daily basis, but to smokers, addiction can be one of the biggest challenges of their lives. Being a quitter myself, every day I feel the temptation to pick up that cigarette, but pure willpower alone stops me. However, pure willpower alone isn’t enough for some people who need a bit of extra help.

One new form of help has come in the form of an interactive game called ‘Super Smoky’. During this game the players were presented with a number of different scenarios, including having to make decisions in situations involving smoking as well as showing players what they might look like in 20 years if they were to continue smoking. It was shown that the players of this game were so affected by the negative consequences of smoking in the game that they had developed more negative attitudes towards smoking, and considered themselves much more likely to quit.

This form of quitting aid could be particularly effective with the younger demographic, who have been shown to be particularly inept at visualizing their own future, especially in terms of their health.

If you want to get an idea of the sort of image you’d be presented with if you played this game, then download the ‘Aging Booth’ app from the app store. Be careful though, because you might be in for a bit of a shock, here’s what I’m going to look like in 20 years:

So, what do you think about this particular aid? Do you think it would help you quit? Write below with your comments or questions. 

Our ever changing earth.

As mentioned in the video below, green is the colour of life. However, this colour isn't always a constant, with plants dying and being reborn with each change in the season. Whilst this is easy enough to say, new technology has allowed us to visualize this process like never before. A new instrument on the NASA-NOAA Suomi satellite has spent the last year capturing the changing levels in plant cover. 

This was done through measuring the different levels of visible light that was reflected back towards to satellite, which would be absorbed by higher levels of plants, and infrared light which plants reflect. This technology, whilst producing something that could be considered visually stunning, could also act as an early warning system for a number of global events. Watch the video below to see the end result. 

What did you think of the video? Write below with your comments and questions, or email newsinscience@gmail.com.

Are plants better than us at maths?

Recent research has suggested that plants need to be able to perform complex maths, in order to regulate their food reserves at night. 

When the sun goes down, plants are no longer able to use sunlight to produce the sugars and starches that they need to survive. Because of this, plants have to use the reserves that they have produced during the day to keep them going throughout the night. This could be compared to if we as humans were expected to hold our breath whenever we weren't eating. Obviously, this must involve complex processes, and recent research has suggested that plants may be smarter than we give them credit for. 

This research suggests that the plant must undergo complicated arithmetic in order to calculate the amount of starch that it can consume overnight so that it can last until the sun rises again at dawn. These calculations are completed by mechanisms within the plant which determine the size of the starch store that has been accumulated throughout the day. This is then compared against an internal clock which is set by the amount of time the plant is exposed to sunlight. An error in the plants calculations could lead to its death, so it is crucial that a measure of both starch, and time is accurate. 

The fact that plants are capable of performing these types of calculations is an incredible feat, and just goes to show us how much we still have to learn about these incredible organisms. 

What do you think about this research? Do you think you'd be able to beat a plant in a maths test? Write below with your comments or questions. 

How can you mend a broken heart?

New research has suggested that the zebra fish, which is capable of repairing its own damaged heart, may hold the answer the curing the problem of cardiovascular disease. 

Heart attacks occur when there is a disruption in the supply of blood to the heart, leading to the cells of the heart to be damaged and die. This occurs most commonly because of a blockage in one of the arteries that supplies blood to the heart, which can occur in a number of different ways. This blockage prevents the cells of the heart from receiving the oxygen they need, leading to their death.

Cardiovascular disease, (especially heart attacks) remain one of the leading causes of death in the world. This is because the adult mammalian brain isn’t capable of sufficiently repairing the heart tissue that is damaged, and instead replaces the damaged tissue with a fibrous collagen scar. Because of this, there is a huge amount of research being geared towards identifying new therapies and strategies to induce the regeneration of lost heart tissue.

Yet again, science has turned to other animals which are capable of things we are not to answer their problems. Studies in the past have shown that fish and amphibians are capable of regenerating their broken hearts, with particular interest in the zebra fish. Zebra fish are particularly useful as a scientific tool because of their simplicity and the high economy with which they can be investigated. So far, using zebra fish has allowed us to conduct genetic suppressor and enhancer screens to identify how the risks of heart disease can be inherited, as well as giving us a massive amount of information on the discovery of new drugs that can be used during therapy.

One piece of research has been able to produce a heart model in the zebra fish using cryoinjury, in order to establish how the zebra fish is capable of repairing itself. Cryoinjury produces a brutal attack on the heart, with 20% cell death of the ventricular wall. From these experiments it could be observed that the initial stages of response are very similar between the zebra fish and us humans. However, later stages of response differed dramatically. As mentioned earlier, in humans the heart tissue is replaced by a fibrous scar tissue. This also occurs in zebra fish but with this scar tissue being progressively replaced by new heart tissue, removing the scar and returning the heart to normal. It was also shown during this research that this tissue remodelling is associated with the accumulation of cimentin-positive fibroblasts and the expression of an extracellular matrix protein Tenascin-C. Further understanding the zebra fishes mode of repair could be crucial in developing therapies for humans, which may allow us to mimic their method of regeneration.

If this type of research continues along the same path and the same rate as it is, we may not be too far away from being able to produce an effective treatment against heart disease. If that does turn out to be the case, we'll owe a lot to the humble zebra fish. 

What do you think about this type of research? Write below with comments and questions or email newsinscience@gmail.com. 

Will silver save us?

A while ago now I published a post explaining how antibiotic resistance in bacteria can develop, which you can find here: http://scienceyoucandigest.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/what-causes-antibiotic-resistance.html

The topic of antibiotic resistance is of crucial importance when considering global health. Over the last few decades the number of bacterial strains that have become resistant to antibiotics has dramatically increased, whilst the rate of newly developed antibiotics has drastically slowed. This has caused a mild panic within the scientific community over how we're going to combat bacterial growth once every strain has become resistant. 

Whilst it was previously thought that the only solution to this problem was developing new antibiotics at a quicker rate, a new method has now been developed where the action of old antibiotics is improved. This is done through the use of silver in the form of dissolved ions. In this form, silver is capable of attacking bacterial cells wither by interfering with their metabolism, or making their cell wall much more permeable. This allows for the more efficient delivery of higher quantities of the antibiotic entering the cell. Therefore, it is not necessarily the action of the silver itself that kills the bacteria. The silver instead facilitates and amplifies the action of the antibiotic, which previously had little effect on the drug resistant bacteria. 

The delivery of a small amount of silver alongside an antibiotic has been shown to increase its killing action by between 10 and 1,000 times. However, drug developers need to tread carefully when it comes to using silver as a therapy. This is because silver in its dissolved form is not only toxic to bacterial cells, but also to other cells within our body. This makes it crucial for new non-toxic forms of the dissolved silver to be discovered and developed, which may finally put the fear of antibiotic resistant bacteria behind us. 

What do you think of this new treatment? Write below with any questions or comments. 

Just because you're ugly doesn't mean you can't do something amazing.

The naked mole rat never develops cancer, a fact which may allow us to develop treatments against the disease in the near future. 

The naked mole rat is the only eusocial mammal known, working as a colony to gain resources for their queen, with incredibly longevity considering their size. With tiny beady eyes, large teeth and saggy white skin, the naked mole rat isn't going to be winning any beauty contests anytime soon. However, that doesn't mean that they can't contribute something valuable to our scientific understanding.

Recent research in a paper released by Tian et al (2013) has suggested that the same molecule which provides the mole rat with their characteristic skin is also capable of preventing the formation of cancerous growths, which may explain why cancer has never been observed in these long living rodents.

This molecule is called high molecular mass hylauranan acid (HMMHA), which forms into long chains over 5 times longer than those found in humans. It is believed that these extraordinarily long HA molecules are capable of forming a cage around a cell, preventing them from dividing in an unregulated manner. The idea that HA confers protection against cancer was supported by experiments where the mole rats could become cancerous by blocking the gene encoding for HA, or upregulating the production of proteins which can degrade HA.

Whilst Tian et al (2013) suggest in their original paper that it is solely the action of HA which confers protection against cancer, other evidence has suggested that the mole rats genomes differ from other vertebrates in such a way as to confer protection against cancer through another route.

This piece of research could do a lot for the development of our understanding of cancer, with future investigations being geared towards transferring HA into mice, who are highly susceptible to cancer. If those experiments are successful, this treatment will then be developed for us in humans, producing a completely unique type of therapy.

What do you think about this research? Comment below with your thoughts or questions or, if you'd like to get the full story find the original paper through the link below;

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature12234.html