Health & Medicine – Page 3

Muscles Love Oxytocin: So-Called “Hug Hormone” Important In Muscle Regeneration

The 'love drug'? More like the muscle rejuvenator! — The ‘love drug’? More like the muscle rejuvenator!

I’ve written before about the most lovable molecule on the planet, oxytocin, and how it isn’t the warm and fuzzy chemical it’s purported to be. Though you’ll often hear it referred to as the ‘love hormone’ or the ‘trust molecule’, oxytocin has a wide variety of effects in our bodies. For the most part, though, scientists (and especially the media) have focused on how it affects our behavior—how sniffing oxytocin changes how so-and-so group of people act when doing such-and-such. But this month, scientists from University of California Berkley reported on a completely different effect of oxytocin—one that has nothing to do with love, trust, or how we behave—and it’s one that might just make the most overhyped molecule on the planet deserve a little bit of the love it gets.

Continue reading “Muscles Love Oxytocin: So-Called “Hug Hormone” Important In Muscle Regeneration”

Should We Stop Using Vinegar To Treat Box Jelly Stings? Not Yet—Venom Experts Weigh In On Recent Study

The dreaded Chironex fleckeri, studied in the new research, and responsible for some of the worst stings in the world. Photo by Dr. Robert Hartwick — The dreaded *Chironex fleckeri,* responsible for some of the worst stings in the world. Does new research change everything we thought we knew about how to treat stings? Experts don’t think so. Photo by Dr. Robert Hartwick

When you’re stung by a box jellyfish, you know it almost immediately. These somewhat squarish shaped cnidarians are armed to the bell with some of the most painful venom in the world. Long tentacles are packed with millions of stinging cells, called nematocysts, each with its own microscopic, needle-like harpoon-tipped tubule waiting to plunge into your flesh and inject the animal’s intense venom. The pain is not only debilitating, it can also be deadly. More than 60 deaths from box jelly stings have been reported in the last forty years.

Being stung is an awful experience. The best course of action is to remove any tentacles quickly to ensure that nematocysts that haven’t fired don’t get the chance to add their venom to the sting, and then treat for pain. Luckily enough, scientists discovered early on that vinegar (~5% acetic acid solution) irreversibly prevents nematocysts from firing, allowing people to rinse off tentacles without causing more trauma (which is also how the folk remedy of peeing on a sting originated, though vinegar is more effective and far less gross). For this reason, vinegar has been the go-to emergency response to box jelly stings for more than twenty years. It is currently the primary recommended treatment by the Australian Resuscitation Council, the American Heart Association and the American Red Cross.

“Now (we’re saying) don’t do what we’ve been telling you to do for the last 30 years,” Jamie Seymour, associate professor at James Cook University, told reporters at The Australian. Seymour’s sudden change of heart is the result of new research published by him with colleagues from the Cairns Hospital, including lead author Philippa Welfare. Other news sites have been quick to cover the story which originated in a press release from James Cook University, warning that “vinegar on jellyfish sting can be deadly” and that “Queensland researchers have discovered the cure can kill.”

Not so fast, guys.

Continue reading “Should We Stop Using Vinegar To Treat Box Jelly Stings? Not Yet—Venom Experts Weigh In On Recent Study”

Is the next blockbuster drug hiding in a century-old venom?

Prialt, a revolutionary painkiller 1,000 times as strong as opiates without the addictive side effects.

Aggrastat. Byetta. Captopril. Integrilin. Prialt. What do these drugs have in common? Not what they’re used for, certainly. From angina to diabetes, they treat different diseases or conditions, and all have very different markets. They’re sold by different companies and were discovered in different laboratories around the world. But all have one simple thing in common: they come from animal venoms.

Continue reading “Is the next blockbuster drug hiding in a century-old venom?”

GCFI’s 2013 Lionfish Session: A Tale In Tweets (#storify #Lionfish2013 #GCFI)

Missed out on this year’s Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute lionfish session? It’s ok! I got you!

Head over to my storify of the session to learn more!

GCFI's 2013 Lionfish Session: A Tale In Tweets http://t.co/9fp4lWj1kZ #lionfish2013 #GCFI

— Christie Wilcox (@NerdyChristie) November 21, 2013

Continue reading “GCFI’s 2013 Lionfish Session: A Tale In Tweets (#storify #Lionfish2013 #GCFI)”

Did Allergies Evolve To Save Your Life?

Introduced bee on a native ʻōhiʻa flower.
Photo by Flickr user Zesuri

As most of my friends on the mainland don longer sleeves and more layers, it’s hard not to be a little smug about living in paradise. While, in their neighborhoods, leaves are falling off of trees and icy winds threaten to bring snow, I can throw on a T-shirt and shorts, grab a picnic basket, and hike to a scenic overlook for lunch. But Hawaii’s ever-sunny weather comes with one side-effect that can be deadly serious: year-round, Hawaii has bees.

Continue reading “Did Allergies Evolve To Save Your Life?”

Cooler than #SharkWeek: Shark Cartilage Won’t Cure Cancer

Discovery Channel has pissed off tons of its viewers—including me and Wil Wheaton—by launching shark week with the mockumentary “Megalodon: The Monster Shark That Lives”. With so much awesome shark science out there, it’s sad that they had to stoop so low for ratings. In response to the outrage, Brian Switek started “Cooler than #SharkWeek” on twitter, highlighting actual research on sharks. I’m continuing the movement by posting or reposting a blog entry about sharks every day this week. So instead of watching Shark Week, tune into Science Sushi all week for real shark science! For today’s post, we revisit my 2011 post on the pseudoscience of shark cartilage pills…

Sharks are incredible animals. They’re some of the world’s most well known creatures, popular enough to get entire weeks of television dedicated to them. They hold a special place in our hearts and minds. Whether you fear them or love them, or a bit of both, they’ve dominated our oceans for hundreds of millions of years, and still manage to evoke powerful emotions from us.

But, as amazing as they are, they are not going to cure cancer. Continue reading “Cooler than #SharkWeek: Shark Cartilage Won’t Cure Cancer”

Choose your cutlery carefully: what you eat with changes how food tastes

205144_655966027200_1509523803_n — My dessert competition entry for my workplace Christmas party last year: eggnog cheesecake. The tough judges from HIMB, like those on TV cooking shows, were scoring looks as well as taste, so I had to go all out!

I have a particular fondness for cooking competitions. Whether it be Iron Chef (the original and the American spinoff), Cupcake Wars or Chopped, once the burners are lit, I can’t seem to look away. Over time, I’ve come to notice that all cooking shows tend to incorporate the same elements when it comes to judging. Taste, of course, is paramount. Creativity and surprise seems to rank high as well. But almost as important as the dish itself, whether a chef is competing in Hell’s Kitchen or on Top Chef, is how it looks. Called presentation or plating, it incorporates everything from the colors of the food to what dish, bowl or glass it’s served in.

Don’t get me wrong — I like pretty things. Some of the stuff these chefs whip up could just as easily belong in the Louvre as on my dinner table. But I never really understood why presentation is so important. Who cares if it looks like Alpo if it tastes delicious? I simply didn’t get the obsession with the visual — until, that is, I began to read the research of scientists like Vanessa Harrar and Charles Spence.

Taste, they have found, is in the eye, ear, and hand of the beholder.

In a study published today in the open access journal Flavour, Harrar and Spence show that even something as overlooked as our cutlery can change our perception of foods.

Continue reading “Choose your cutlery carefully: what you eat with changes how food tastes”

The Very Thick Line Between Raising Concerns And Denialism

road — The real question is, which side of the line are studies that lack scientific rigor on?
Image credit: silent47

Recently, Kara Moses asked Guardian readers: “Should we wait for conclusive scientific studies before becoming concerned about an issue?” Her personal answer was no; that special interest groups should perform and publicize their own findings. “I believe they should be given a voice,” she concluded, “not dismissed out of hand for lacking the scientific rigour demanded by professional scientists.”

Quick to support her was Treehugger writer Chris Tackett. “The point here is that scientific proof matters in science, but it shouldn’t necessarily be what determines our actions,” he wrote. “We can intuit that some things are unwise or dangerous or against our values without needing reams of scientific data to back up our concerns.” While Kara’s piece talked only about the use of glyphosate (the pesticide known by its brand name RoundUp), Chris used it to attack both the pesticide’s use and Monsanto GM crops.

I understand where they are coming from, but the hair on the back of my neck bristled reading those words. I think they’re both getting into very dangerous territory (or, in the case of Chris’ comments later, happily dancing around in it). The trouble is, it’s one thing to notice a potential danger and raise a few alarm bells to get scientists to investigate an issue — it’s a whole other to publicize and propagandize an unsubstantiated fear despite evidence against it. The former is important, as Kara suggests, and should occur. I have no problem with non-scientists raising honest concerns, if their goal is to have the concerns considered — so long as they’re actually willing to hear what the evidence has to say. The latter, on the other hand, is denialism. You see, once scientists have weighed in, you have to be willing to listen to them. Continue reading “The Very Thick Line Between Raising Concerns And Denialism”

Eau de Manipulation: Malarial Mosquitoes More Attracted To Human Scent

5659_lores — An *Anopheles gambiae* mosquito gorging herself on blood. Photo by Jim Gathany, from the CDC’s Public Health Image Library

By the time you realize what has happened, it’s too late. An Anopheles gambiae mosquito can land on your skin completely unnoticed. While you continue unaware, she stealthily walks over your exposed flesh, searching, probing the surface of your skin with her proboscis until she finds a blood vessel. She then situates her body perfectly at just the right angle, hunches down, and plunges her needle-like mouthparts into your skin. Tiny pumps pull the warm, protein-rich blood into her mouth.

With every millisecond increasing her chances of exposure, she drinks as quickly as she can. Your hand isn’t the only obstacle she faces: even as she sucks, your body senses the wound and attempts to plug the hole by forming a clot. She needs your warm, nutritious blood for her eggs, so she’s not about to let your protective mechanisms interfere. To ensure her meal keeps flowing, she pumps saliva laden with anti-coagulants and vasodilators into the wound — and that’s when it happens. That’s when the Plasmodium falciprum sporozoites that have been waiting patiently in her salivary glands enter your bloodstream. Dozens can hitch a ride in her saliva, but it only takes one to cause malaria. One single, microscopic protozoan is enough to kill you. Continue reading “Eau de Manipulation: Malarial Mosquitoes More Attracted To Human Scent”

Esteemed Journal Nature Dedicates Issue To GMOs, Defends Technology

Anyone who reads this blog regularly knows I have a big bone to pick with the organic movement, particularly with their constant attack on genetic engineering. I applauded when Prop 37 failed in California, and have put out post after post explaining why GMOs aren’t the root of all evil. That’s not to say I’m pro Monsanto, or think every GMO is science’s gift to humanity. But the universal fear and demonization of all genetic technology is, simply put, damaging and unfounded.

Nature_Cover — Turn that frown upside-down — the newest *Nature* issue defends GMOs. Cover image provided by *Nature*.

Now, the top-tier scientific journal Nature has weighed in. In their “GM Crops: Promise & Reality” issue this week, several articles explore “the messy middle ground.” With titles like “Tarnished Promise” and “A Hard Look At GM Crops,” you might think they attack genetic engineering, but in fact, the entire issue does the opposite, standing in support of crop genetic engineering technologies and pleading to rethink the knee-jerk reaction against them. Even the “Hard Look” concludes, “Tidy stories, in favour of or against GM crops, will always miss the bigger picture, which is nuanced, equivocal and undeniably messy. Transgenic crops will not solve all the agricultural challenges facing the developing or developed world… But vilification is not appropriate either. The truth is somewhere in the middle.”

Which is exactly what I’ve been saying all along. Continue reading “Esteemed Journal Nature Dedicates Issue To GMOs, Defends Technology”