All posts by medical

Can Video Game Playing Cost You Gray Matter? – Bloomington Pantagraph

MONDAY, Aug. 7 2017 (HealthDay News) -- A new study suggests -- but doesn't prove -- that certain players of action video games may lose gray matter in a part of the brain that's linked to mental illness.

On the other hand, the Canadian study suggests, other players may actually benefit from the games.

And a psychologist not involved with the study said there's no evidence that video games are harmful to the brain.

The results indicate that the reported benefits of playing shooting-style video games -- such as improved attention and short-term memory -- "might come at a cost" in terms of lost brain matter in some players, said the study's lead author, Gregory West. He is an assistant professor with the department of psychology at the University of Montreal.

The difference may be the style of playing, the researchers noted.

The new study aimed to better understand the brain effects of so-called first-person and third-person shooting games -- such as Call of Duty, Battlefield, Killzone, or Medal of Honor -- compared to "3-D platform" games in the Super Mario series.

The researchers used a virtual-reality test, MRIs and 90 hours of game-playing involving 100 people who were either expert or nonexpert players. They also used MRIs to assess the impact on the hippocampus, the part of the brain that helps spatial and episodic memory.

The results showed evidence that gray matter in the hippocampus grew in those players who used so-called spatial strategies to find their way in the action video game. But the gray matter shrunk in those who navigated the same games by learned response.

Spatial players create maps in their heads to understand the geography of the world within the game, the researchers explained. And response players use an approach akin to learning a route that you travel every day -- make a right turn here, then a left, then a right -- so that you can drive on mental auto-pilot without thinking.

Those who played the Super Mario games, meanwhile, showed signs of growth in either the hippocampus or another part of the brain called the entorhinal cortex.

The study authors emphasized that they aren't saying that anyone who plays video games will develop a mental illness.

"But we know that those with less gray matter in the hippocampus are more at risk to get conditions like schizophrenia, post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and Alzheimer's disease," said study co-author Veronique Bohbot. She is an associate professor with the department of psychiatry at McGill University in Montreal.

A video game expert called brain studies of game players problematic.

"Given that there are so many areas in the brain, it stands to reason that, by chance alone, some of these areas may randomly differ between any two groups of people," said Chris Ferguson, a professor of psychology with Stetson University in DeLand, Fla.

"Researchers can sometimes make a big deal out of these random differences and ascribe them to something like video games," he said.

Ferguson noted that overall brain research into the effects of the games hasn't revealed problems.

"Despite some wild headlines and press releases from time to time, the research suggests that video game playing is entirely safe for the brain," Ferguson said.

"The aggregate of studies have not suggested that playing video games, even 'violent' ones, cause either short- or long-term brain changes that are problematic or could be called 'brain damage,' " he added.

"Most studies also don't connect the brain differences to actual behavior. So brain studies often function like Rorschach cards, telling you more about what the researchers want to believe than anything actually happening with human behavior," Ferguson suggested.

What should video game players do? Study lead author West suggests that adults play shooter games for only two to three hours a week.

Ferguson noted that research is hinting that video games may reduce stress and improve problem-solving abilities.

"Playing video games should be balanced with other activities: offline socialization, exercise, work and school, family and good sleep," he said. "As long as games are part of a balanced lifestyle, there's no evidence that they cause harmful brain changes."

The study was published in the Aug. 7 issue of Molecular Psychiatry.

Excerpt from:
Can Video Game Playing Cost You Gray Matter? - Bloomington Pantagraph

Safety and Performance Excellence: Two-Dimensional Safety – EHS Today

The American Society of Safety Engineers conference in Denver sponsored a debate of sorts between the proponents of behavior-based safety (BBS) and what has come to be called human and organizational performance (HOP). These were touted as two different philosophies of workplace safety aimed at reducing workplace injuries and fatalities. The latter of these two was presented as a shift in thinking.

There are several problems with both ways of thinking that should be obvious to those in charge of safety at the site or organizational level.

The first problem is that neither of these represent an overall strategy for safety. Each approach focuses on one aspect of what is needed to create a safe workplace and ignores almost everything else. Neither really is a philosophy, but rather a program or process.

A true strategy is a value proposition that defines how to win. In the case of safety, it would define how to win the war against accidental injuries and fatalities. Both these approaches fail to define what true safety excellence looks like or what it takes to achieve it. Rather, both prescribe a series of steps to fail less.

For decades, safety metrics largely have been lagging indicators or failure metrics. Such measurements prompt organizations to work reactively to drive the metrics down or fail less. Success is defined as the lack of failure rather than a strategic achievement.

The second problem lies in the fact that every site (even within the same organization) has a unique culture. While both of these approaches have been successful at reducing accidents, the successes are less a function of methodology and more a function of fit. BBS stresses working on specific behaviors and HOP stresses working on organizational support factors. The approach that will work best for the specific site is the one that best addresses the site-specific safety challenges. The factor that can change this reality is the extent to which the process can be customized for the site.

BBS became so popular at one time that many practices with little to do with mainstream behavioral thinking were labeled as BBS. Academic experts and consultants proposed very specific methods for doing BBS. Because of this, many people have a very limited or specific view of what BBS really is. Based on the most popular approaches, BBS has several main components:

Selecting specific safety-related worker behaviors. Observing workers to see if they are doing these behaviors. Using various methods to encourage (positively reinforce) or discourage the behaviors. Using the observation data as a leading indicator to enhance safety. Some attempted to shape the safety culture through worker interaction, caring and ownership of the process.

Many of these approaches to change worker behaviors failed to realize and address the organizational influences on the behaviors and simply attempted to force a change at the individual worker level. This omission was one factor that led to the formation of HOP.

Human and organizational performance (HOP) proposes that workplace factors of various sorts impact worker behavior and the organization should align these factors to prompt the kind of safety performance it wants.

The spokesman for human and organizational excellence in this debate explained the difference, stating BBS sees the worker as the problem to be solved while HOP views the employee as the problem solver. Neither of these recognize the worker as the customer of safety efforts. The workers definitely are not the safety problem, but neither are they the problem solvers. If workers could solve their own safety problems, they already would have done so.

While HOP requests feedback from workers on what they need to be safe, it ignores the truism that people dont know what they dont know. It is the responsibility of the safety efforts to add value to the worker: increased skills, better risk awareness, strategies for handling risks, personal protective equipment, etc. Even if the worker doesnt know they need these things, the safety department should.

Safety constantly should try to predict and exceed the needs of the worker, not just meet the known demands. Steve Jobs said no one knew they needed a smart phone until he invented one. Henry Ford said if he had given people what they thought they wanted, it would have been a faster horse. It is not enough to just ask workers and rely on their perceived wants and needs.

In all fairness, the statement that BBS views the worker as the problem is inaccurate as well. Most BBS programs focus on behaviors and realize that behavior is influenced by much more than the individual. In this regard, the two philosophies tend to agree. The organization should manage influences on human behavior, not just ask workers to change.

In this sense, these two approaches are part of a greater whole. BBS produces a measurement of targeted behaviors and an excellent opportunity to better understand what influences behavior at the very touchpoint where it is happening. If BBS observers would quit confronting workers to change behavior and start asking why when desired behaviors are not occurring, the organization could better target the specific influences impacting worker behavior.

Without such information, human and organizational performance approaches are simply seeking generic actions to prompt performance. Without the why approach, BBS naively is thinking it can change behaviors without changing the influences on behavior that could be modified in a HOP program. If these two programs quit debating and start cooperating, the result would be a much more holistic approach.

Even so, addressing worker behavior and its organizational influences only impacts one element of safety excellence. The greatest potential value of either of these programs (or a combination of them) would be if they fit into an overarching safety strategy that defined success and the specific role these programs would contribute to that success.

Terry Mathis, founder and CEO of ProAct Safety, has served as a consultant and advisor for top organizations. A respected strategist and thought leader in the industry, Mathis has authored four books and numerous articles and blogs and is known for his dynamic and engaging presentations. EHS Today has named him one of the 50 People Who Most Influenced EHS four consecutive times. Mathis can be reached at [emailprotected] or 800-395-1347.

The rest is here:
Safety and Performance Excellence: Two-Dimensional Safety - EHS Today

Grey’s Anatomy Is Making So Many Cast Changes, We Can Barely … – SheKnows.com

Share Pin Share Tumble

Combined comments & shares on social media

Updated Aug. 8, 2017, 8 a.m. PT: Grey's Anatomy is making casting changes so quickly, we can hardly keep up.

In the latest announcement, Refinery29 reports that series regular Marika Dominczyk, who plays Dr. Eliza Minnick, won't be returning for Season 14.

Fans who watched the end of the last season probably won't be surprised. Eliza Minnick joined at the start of Season 13, and she came into Grey Sloan Memorial like a wrecking ball, pissing off pretty much every doctor (except Arizona, who she instead dated), and getting unceremoniously fired by Bailey in the season finale. At least Shonda Rhimes didn't kill her, so the door is open for her to reappear later. Let's all just hold out hope for that.

Original story:

Grey's Anatomy has some pretty big casting news for Season 14.

More: Jesse Williams' Insta Is Making Us So Hungry for Grey's Anatomy

Glee star Matthew Morrison has revealed that he'll be reprising his role from the end of Season 13 as Dr. Paul Stadler by returning as a series regular in the upcoming season. But Morrison is staying tight-lipped about the details, saying only that he has a "big role coming up." What we do know is that there will be drama between Morrison's character and Justin Chambers' character, Alex Karev. They crossed paths briefly at the end of the 13th season, where it was revealed that Dr. Stadler is Jo's abusive estranged husband, and if we know anything about Alex Karev, it's that he fiercely defends the people he loves.

The show's upcoming season will also welcome Timeless star Abigail Spencer as Owen's sister, Megan Hunt. Megan was presumed to be dead, but the end of the Season 13 finale saw Owen anxiously awaiting her arrival to Seattle. She was previously played by Bridget Regan, who was unable to take the recurring role due to her commitment to TNT's Last Ship. She did congratulate Spencer on landing the role, though.

More: Grey's Anatomy's Finale Had a Sad Goodbye but These Deaths Were Way Worse

"Thanks for all the love guys! @abigailspencer is an incredible actor, tip top lady and will be a BRILLIANT Megan on #GreysAnatomy," she wrote.

More: Grey's Anatomy Season 14 Will Feature a Blast From the Past

Season 14 of Grey's Anatomy premieres with a two-hour episode on Thursday, Sept. 28.

The rest is here:
Grey's Anatomy Is Making So Many Cast Changes, We Can Barely ... - SheKnows.com

Anatomy of a Leader: The practical skills you need to get to the top – Marketing Week

Human, empathetic, rational, emotional, brave and agile just a snapshot of the essential attributes a modern marketing leader must possess.

From being data literate and adept at driving sales, to having the ability to tell a rich brand story, marketers can feel under real pressure to excel at every aspect of the role in order to succeed. This pressure, coupled with the shrinking length of CMO tenure, is putting marketing leaders under the microscope like never before.

To examine the key skills and attributes required by a modern marketing leader in 2017 Marketing Week has carried out an in-depthqualitative and quantitive study, mapping out the Anatomy of a Leader.

The first part of the study looked at the core responsibilities of a marketing leader, with our survey of more than 600 marketers finding thatsales and commercial awareness (74%) is considered the most important responsibility for marketing leaders.

Now, switching the focus to the essential attributes of a modern leader, it is strategic thinking that most marketers (86%) believe is imperative.

Relationship building came in a distant second (61%), followed by people management (60%), vision (59%) and problem solving (57%).

Conversely, visual presentation emerged as the least important skill for a marketing leader (14%), followed by practicality (15%), general knowledge (16%), specialist knowledge (16%) and written communication (20%).

READ MORE:Take our quiz to find out if you have the Anatomy of a Leader

Recognition of the importance of strategy is welcomed by Marketing Week columnist Mark Ritson: In recent years, marketing has become more and more tactical and we have lost the art of developing clear strategic direction first. We like to debate the knobs and dials of communication, but do not have a clear strategy for our brands first.

Adaptability (87%) was identified as the attribute growing most in importance for marketing leaders, followed by strategic thinking (83%), vision (81%) and technical proficiency (77%).

The fact that strategic thinking, commercial awareness and vision are now seen as being more important is unsurprising since more marketing leaders are moving into roles with a broader set of commercial and customer accountabilities, says Direct Line Groups marketing director, Mark Evans.

What is perhaps surprising is that more marketing leaders believe that technical proficiency has simultaneously become more important. I suspect that this relates to being literate and staying fresh with regards to all things digital. However, there is a risk of being a jack of all trades and a master of none.

Evans recognises that not all digital skills are a must-have for marketing leaders and while it is helpful for CMOs to understand developments in digital, it is better to remain channel agnostic.

CMOs may feel pressure to personally build digital skills, but I dont think its something to lose sleep over if you have invested in your team, he adds.

Bacardi head of creative excellence, Zara Mirza, agrees it is less about being a super CMO who can do it all and more about building strong teams. At Bacardi, we have more than one CMO. We have me, we have a head of data, head of PR. Together we figure it out and we all report into the CEO.

Thats a smart move as theres not going to be one person as a super CMO. Having lots of perspectives and figuring it out together will give you a better chance of success.

READ MORE:Russell Parsons The modern marketing leaders might not be who you think

Looking ahead, problem solving (77%), the ability to listen (74%), resilience (74%), people management (67%) and risk taking (67%) are key attributes that marketers say are becoming the DNA of a marketing leader.

By contrast the research finds that experience (11%), specialist knowledge (10%), tactical execution (9%) and assertiveness (7%) are the attributes marketers are most likely to identify as becoming less important to the make up of the modern leader.

LinkedIn CMO ShannonStubo believes asking the right questions and using the answers to solve problems is the hallmark of a successful leader. Reflecting on her own background in PR, Stubo explains that despite not having the typical marketing experience of most CMOs, she understands how to set a vision, hire great people and build excellent teams.

Marketing leaders need to be able to identify the right talent, but also be relationship-focused with key stakeholders. They need to be able to dedicate time to mentoring and coaching to help teams develop, as well as navigate and adapt to increasingly fast-moving trends, she adds.

READ MORE: LinkedIns CMO on being a marketing boss with PR DNA

Reflecting on the skills he feels are missing from the top survey findings, Britvic CMO Matt Barwell highlights the ability to lead creatively and encourage an environment of creative thinking, which he argues are attributes far more likely to deliver true breakthroughs.

Humanity and empathy are the stand-out traits of a brilliant marketing leader in the opinion of Tommy Hilfiger CMO Avery Baker, who argues that leading without an ego is the only way to get the best out of people.

However, these softer skillsfail to impress Ritson. All this wank about humanity and bravery is the outcome of sitting around on yachts in Cannes feeling each others pain. Its time for marketers to wake up and smell the coffee. Our role is as a fundamental part of organisational success, not some personality-driven, self help group for sensitive people.

Peugeot marketing director Mark Pickles disagrees, arguing that marketers ultimately have to be brave and adaptable in order to succeed.

It is only by understanding the core desires, motivations and demands of consumers, and being brave enough to consider how to quickly adapt the enterprise to deliver these that the modern marketer can survive and prosper.

However, in the opinion of IBM CMO Lisa Gilbert, the perfect marketing leader is T-shaped. She defines this as a mixture of general leadership skills, like the ability to set a vision or the tenacity to bring an idea over the finish line, combined with expertise such as the ability create a compelling narrative or get to the root of a data problem.

This mix of skills is underpinned by empathy and the ability to manage your energy, explains Gilbert.

Being a leader in this fast-paced industry takes stamina. Fortifying yourself with people who lift you up, coupled with a few good nights sleep are critical to winning the marathon of leadership versus the sprint.

At its core Marketing Weeksresearch reaffirms how essential it is for marketers of any level to possess strong commercial awareness and strategic thinking, talents that are superseding functional skills such as copywriting and design.

To be a successful marketing leader the key is to recognise that you do not need to be good at everything and that fundamentally it is far more valuable to ask the right questions, listen to the answers and empower your teams to execute your vision with confidence and creativity.

Marketing Week will further explore the necessaryqualitiesfor leadership on the Realising YourPotential stage at the Festival of Marketing in October. For tickets, visit festivalofmarketing.com

Original post:
Anatomy of a Leader: The practical skills you need to get to the top - Marketing Week

Grey’s Anatomy Stars Tease "Sexy" Season 14 – TV Guide

Now PlayingGrey's Anatomy: Will DeLuca and Jo Get Together in Season 14?

With Jo's (Camilla Luddington) estranged husband Paul (Matthew Morrison) back in the picture when Grey's Anatomyreturns for Season 14, will her love triangle with DeLuca (Giacomo Gianniotti) and Alex (Justin Chambers) become a... quadrangle?

Not anytime soon, Luddington assures.

"I have yet to read a script that has my ex-husband back in it," Luddington told TV Guide at the Television Critics Association summer press tour in Los Angeles this week. "It's definitely a storyline that I hope we explore, because it's so important. But right now, it's [DeLuca] and Alex."

Of course, Jo has no idea that Alex went to confront her ex at the end of Season 13 -- and DeLuca has no idea either.

Grey's Anatomy Adds a Controversial New Doctor for Season 14

"When Jo finds out that Alex did that, I don't know what her reaction's going to be," Luddington admits. "I feel like it could go either way. They're in a really interesting time in their relationship, and it's very tricky. ... Do I think that it could push them even further away from each other? It's definitely possible."

But will it push Jo further away from Alex and then into the arms of DeLuca? We'll have to wait and see, but this is Grey's, so one thing is certain: there will be complications. For now, Jo will be leaning on DeLuca in a friendship capacity in Stephanie's (Jerrika Hinton) absence. And, after confessing his feelings to Jo didn't go over so well at the end of last season, DeLuca may be looking to move on.

"It might be a little bit more awkward, now that there's some things that have been shared between us that are a little bit more intimate," Gianniotti tells TV Guide. "We're bringing on some new people, and so there might be something there. ... If [a new romance] was to happen, I feel like Jo's the one that got away [for DeLuca]."

Adds Luddington: "This season's going to be very sexy. ... I can imagine [Jo] maybe feeling a little bit jealous if DeLuca started dating someone else. But I think she's at a time in her life right now where she has to deal with her own emotional journey and what she's going through in her past ... before she really jumps straight into a relationship with someone else. There's some stuff that she has to work through."

Grey's Anatomy kicks off Season 14 with a two-hour premiere Thursday, Sept. 28 at 8/7c on ABC.

The rest is here:
Grey's Anatomy Stars Tease "Sexy" Season 14 - TV Guide

The anatomy of the White Sox’ 3-19 second half – South Side Sox

When youre a rebuilding team, its hard to find wins anywhere, but this current stretch is a tall order for anybody.

The White Sox ended the first half with three games against the Rockies, then opened the second half with the Mariners, Dodgers, Royals, Cubs, Indians, Blue Jays and Red Sox. Theyll start a series with the Astros today, followed by more Royals and Dodgers before a softer week arrives.

Thats nine teams with winning records at the time the White Sox played them, and the Mariners are over .500 and adding now (they acquired Yonder Alonso). The math says the White Sox would find it difficult to win, and the results bear that out, with a whopping 20 losses over their last 23 games.

As a result, the White Sox are now within one game of the No. 1 pick in the 2018 draft.

Heres how the standings looked at the opening of the second half.

The White Sox made up eight games on the Phillies over a stretch of 22 games, during a stretch where the Phillies played only .500 baseball. This is like The Phold in reverse.

Its been a team effort, because the White Sox sport both ...

Baseballs worst offense: In the second half, the White Sox rank dead last in all of baseball in runs (68), OBP (.284) and OPS (.658) ... and that includes teams that dont have the designated hitter. The position players as a group are 0.1 wins below replacement. The Brewers are the only ones worse, and by one-tenth of a point.

... and ...

The leagues worst pitching: The White Sox have the ALs worst second-half ERA at 5.34, with the Rockies (5.68) and Red (5.84) trailing. It could be worse, because the Sox have yielded a whopping 45 homers over 193 23 innings, along with the highest OBP (.371) and slugging percentage (.520). The Rockies are the only team within 50 points of OPS, and they play at Coors Field. Most of this is on the rotation, which has a 6.28 ERA (second-worst) and a 1.69 WHIP (easily the worst) since the All-Star break. As a whole, the White Sox pitching staff has been worth -1.5 WAR, with every other team on the positive side.

Its not all bad. Carlos Rodon has finally tied together two overpowering starts, Yoan Moncada went 5-for-14 with three walks during the Boston series, and Reynaldo Lopez is starting on Friday, although the White Sox havent yet made that official. There are aspects of this team worth watching on a regular basis.

They just get overshadowed by the overwhelming talent deficit the Sox face day in and day out. Most of it shows up on the scoreboard, but theyre even battling parts that get buried in the box scores (the White Sox running into outs while being unable to slow down the running game, for instance).

The arrival of baseballs sluggingest offense figures to only exacerbate the problem, but the White Sox arent too good for anybody anymore. If they can only count on wins against teams with worse records, they wont play the Philles until 2019.

Excerpt from:
The anatomy of the White Sox' 3-19 second half - South Side Sox

Biocomputers Made From Cells Can Now Handle More Complex Logic – Singularity Hub

When it comes to biomolecules, RNA doesnt get a lot of love.

Maybe you havent even heard of the silent workhorse. RNA is the cells de facto translator: like a game of telephone, RNA takes DNAs genetic code to a cellular factory called ribosomes. There, the cell makes proteins based on RNAs message.

But RNA isnt just a middleman. It controls what proteins are formed. Because proteins wiz around the cell completing all sorts of important processes, you can say that RNA is the gatekeeper: no RNA message, no proteins, no life.

In a new study published in Nature, RNA finally took center stage. By adding bits of genetic material to the E. Coli bacteria, a team of biohackers at the Wyss Institute hijacked the organisms RNA messengers so that they only spring into action following certain inputs.

The result? A bacterial biocomputer capable of performing 12-input logic operationsAND, OR, and NOTfollowing specific inputs. Rather than outputting 0s and 1s, these biocircuits produce results based on the presence or absence of proteins and other molecules.

Its the greatest number of inputs in a circuit that a cell has been able to process, says study author Dr. Alexander Green at Arizona State University. To be able to analyze those signals andmake a decision is the big advance here.

When given a specific set of inputs, the bacteria spit out a protein that made them glow neon green under fluorescent light.

But synthetic biology promises far more than just a party trickby tinkering with a cells RNA repertoire, scientists may one day coax them to photosynthesize, produce expensive drugs on the fly, or diagnose and hunt down rogue tumor cells.

This isnt the first time that scientists hijacked lifes algorithms to reprogram cells into nanocomputing systems. Previous work has already introduced to the world yeast cells that can make anti-malaria drugs from sugar or mammalian cells that can perform Boolean logic.

Yet circuits with multiple inputs and outputs remain hard to program. The reason is this: synthetic biologists have traditionally focused on snipping, fusing, or otherwise arranging a cells DNA to produce the outcomes they want.

But DNA is two steps removed from proteins, and tinkering with lifes code often leads to unexpected consequences. For one, the cell may not even accept and produce the extra bits of DNA code. For another, the added code, when transformed into proteins, may not act accordingly in the crowded and ever-changing environment of the cell.

Whats more, tinkering with one gene is often not enough to program an entirely new circuit. Scientists often need to amp up or shut down the activity of multiple genes, or multiple biological modules each made up of tens or hundreds of genes.

Its like trying to fit new Lego pieces in a specific order into a room full of Lego constructions. Each new piece has the potential to wander off track and click onto something its not supposed to touch.

Getting every moving component to work in syncas you might have guessedis a giant headache.

With ribocomputing, Green and colleagues set off to tackle a main problem in synthetic biology: predictability.

Named after the R (ribo) in RNA, the method grew out of an idea that first struck Green back in 2012.

The synthetic biological circuits to date have relied heavily on protein-based regulators that are difficult to scale up, Green wrote at the time. We only have a limited handful of designable parts that work well, and these circuits require significant resources to encode and operate, he explains.

RNA, in comparison, is a lot more predictable. Like its more famous sibling DNA, RNA is composed of units that come in four different flavors: A, G, C, and U. Although RNA is only single-stranded, rather than the double helix for which DNA is known for, it can bind short DNA-like sequences in a very predictable manner: Gs always match up with Cs and As always with Us.

Because of this predictability, its possible to design RNA components that bind together perfectly. In other words, it reduces the chance that added RNA bits might go rogue in an unsuspecting cell.

Normally, once RNA is produced it immediately rushes to the ribosomethe cells protein-building factory. Think of it as a constantly on system.

However, Green and his team found a clever mechanism to slow them down. Dubbed the toehold switch, it works like this: the artificial RNA component is first incorporated into a chain of A, G, C, and U folded into a paperclip-like structure.

This blocks the RNA from accessing the ribosome. Because one RNA strand generally maps to one protein, the switch prevents that protein from ever getting made.

In this way, the switch is set to off by defaulta NOT gate, in Boolean logic.

To activate the switch, the cell needs another component: a trigger RNA, which binds to the RNA toehold switch. This flips it on: the RNA grabs onto the ribosome, and bamproteins.

String a few RNA switches together, with the activity of each one relying on the one before, and it forms an AND gate. Alternatively, if the activity of each switch is independent, thats an OR gate.

Basically, the toehold switches performed so well that we wanted to find a way to best exploit them for cellular applications, says Green. Theyre kind of the equivalent of your first transistors, he adds.

Once the team optimized the designs for different logic gates, they carefully condensed the switches into gate RNA molecules. These gate RNAs contain both codes for proteins and the logic operations needed to kickstart the processa molecular logic circuit, so to speak.

If youve ever played around with an Arduino-controlled electrical circuit, you probably know the easiest way to test its function is with a light bulb.

Thats what the team did here, though with a biological bulb: green fluorescent protein, a light-sensing protein not normally present in bacteria thatwhen turned onmakes the microbugs glow neon green.

In a series of experiments, Green and his team genetically inserted gate RNAs into bacteria. Then, depending on the type of logical function, they added different combinations of trigger RNAsthe inputs.

When the input RNA matched up with its corresponding gate RNA, it flipped on the switch, causing the cell to light up.

Their most complex circuit contained five AND gates, five OR gates, and two NOTsa 12-input ribocomputer that functioned exactly as designed.

Thats quite the achievement. Everything is interacting with everything else and there are a million ways those interactions could flip the switch on accident, says RNA researcher Dr. Julies Lucks at Northwestern University.

The specificity is thanks to RNA, the authors explain. Because RNAs bind to others so predictably, we can now design massive libraries of gate and trigger units to mix-and-match into all types of nano-biocomputers.

Although the technology doesnt have any immediate applications, the team has high hopes.

For the first time, its now possible to massively scale up the process of programming new circuits into living cells. Weve expanded the library of available biocomponents that can be used to reprogram lifes basic code, the authors say.

Whats more, when freeze-dried onto a piece of tissue paper, RNA keeps very well. We could potentially print RNA toehold switches onto paper that respond to viruses or to tumor cells, the authors say, essentially transforming the technology into highly accurate diagnostic platforms.

But Greens hopes are even wilder for his RNA-based circuits.

Because were using RNA, a universal molecule of life, we know these interactions can also work in other cells, so our method provides a general strategy that could be ported to other organisms, he says.

Ultimately, the hope is to program neural network-like capabilities into the bodys other cells.

Imagine cells endowed with circuits capable of performing the kinds of computation the brain does, the authors say.

Perhaps one day, synthetic biology will transform our own cells into fully programmable entities, turning us all into biological cyborgs from the inside. How wild would that be?

Image Credit: Wyss Institute at Harvard University

Continue reading here:
Biocomputers Made From Cells Can Now Handle More Complex Logic - Singularity Hub

Appointment and reappointment to the Institute for Research in … – Markets Insider

MONTREAL, Aug. 7, 2017 /CNW Telbec/ - The Institute for Research in Immunology and Cancer (IRIC) of the Universit de Montral (UdeM) is pleased to announce that the UdeM Executive Committee has reappointed Mr.Robert Tessier as Chairman of the Board and has appointed Ms.Lucie Rmillard as a Board member.

The IRIC welcomes with great enthusiasm Mr.Tessier's reappointment and looks forward to his three-year mandate. Mr.Tessier is also Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Caisse de dpt et placement du Qubec.

Drawing on 12 years of active involvement with the organization, Mr.Tessier, as Chairman of the Board, will be surrounded by a team of dedicated collaborators sharing a wealth of expertise and various academic, business and philanthropic networks which they may call upon.

The IRIC will now be able to rely on the support of Lucie Rmillard, a corporate director with an extensive knowledge of the philanthropic sector acquired over the years, on the multifaceted work experience of Frdric Bouchard, Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) of the UdeM, as well as the dedication of current Board members: Dr.Marie-Jose Hbert, Vice-Rector of Research, Discovery, Creation and Innovation at the UdeM, Dr. Hlne Boisjoly, Dean of the UdeM's Faculty of Medicine, Jacques Bernier, Managing Partner at Teralys Capital, Marie-Jose Coutu, President of the Marcelle and Jean Coutu Foundation, Jean Royer, Vice-President of Distinction Capital, Michel Bouvier, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Investigator at the IRIC, and Marc Therrien, Scientific Director and Principal Investigator at the IRIC.

"The IRIC is truly fortunate to be able to count on a Board of such high calibre which, through its commitment and dedication to research, continues to support the Institute's objectives and development." Michel Bouvier, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Investigator at the IRIC

The IRIC would like to take this opportunity to extend its heartfelt thanks to the Board's outgoing members for their involvement and unwavering support throughout their mandate. Many thanks to Tania Saba, former interim Dean at the UdeM's FAS as well as Tenured professor of the UdeM, to Grard Boismenu, Vice-Rector of Academic Development and Institutional Transformation of the UdeM, to Johane Boucher-Champagne, former Chair of IRICoR's Board of Directors, and Jacques Parisien, director and advisor for several Canadian companies.

About the Institute for Research in Immunology and Cancer (IRIC)An ultra-modern research hub and training centre located in the heart of the Universit de Montral, the Institute for Research in Immunology and Cancer (IRIC) was created in 2003 to shed light on the mechanisms of cancer and discover new, more effective therapies to counter this disease. The IRIC operates according to a model that is unique in Canada. Its innovative approach to research has already led to discoveries that will, over the coming years, have a significant impact on the fight against cancer. For more information: http://www.iric.ca/en/

SOURCE Institut de recherche en immunologie et en cancrologie de l'Universit de Montral

Continue reading here:
Appointment and reappointment to the Institute for Research in ... - Markets Insider

Men, delayed childbearing and age-related fertility decline – BioNews

While media reports regularly remind us of women's biological clocks and warn of the dangers of women leaving it 'too late'to have children, until recently little attention has been paid to the role of men in timing when to have children, and the effect of age on male fertility. However, July 2017 saw a surge of interest in this in mainstream media, following evidence from the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School presented at the European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology's (ESHRE) annual conference. Findings from a study of 18,802 IVF cycles suggest that amongst couples undergoing the procedure, for men over 35 increasing age was associated with lower cumulative incidence of live birth. Outlets including TheGuardian, theBBC (includingBBC Radio 4) and BioNews picked up on these findings, bringing this discussion into the public domain. The Guardian and theBBC also reported findings from asystematic review, from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, of recent trends in sperm counts, which reported a decline in sperm concentration and count between 1971 and 2011.

Thus the accepted wisdom that men can continue to have children into later life, easily and without consequence, has been called into question. In some articles, authors blame men's lack of awareness of age-related fertility decline, and lazy or glib attitudes towards having children, either explicitly or implicitly. Alongside this, coverage of recent research (Inhorn, Baldwin, Gurten) on egg freezing suggests that women freeze their eggs because they are not able to find a suitable male partner; there is a 'dearth of eligible men' wherein the number of qualified, professional women is not matched by an equivalent number of qualified, professional men. These accounts have added weight to the idea that men's roles in relationships, in starting a family, and in when to start a family are of crucial importance.

Prior to this, to a large extent media attention had mirrored social science research on the topic: the minimal focus on men being greatly outweighed by a focus on women. This is also reflected in our national data collection: while the Office for National Statistics (ONS) gathers data on women's ages at the birth of their first child, this is not the case for men; for men, a distinction between first and subsequent children is not made, as it is for women. Consequently, while we can track changes in the age at which women are becoming mothers, we cannot track trends in when men are becoming fathers.

Nonetheless, ONS data does suggest that the average age of men at the birth of any children has risen from 31.1 in 1993 to 33.2 in 2015. Research suggests that the majority of men want children, and being an 'older' father isn't something most desire. Men identify certain pre-conditions as necessary before embarking on parenthood, including being in a good relationship with the right partner and someone whom they feel would make a good parent; having financial and material security; and feeling emotionally and psychologically ready. Men's aspirations to be both the breadwinner, as well as a nurturing and involved father, also create added pressures.

However, scientific evidence about the impact of age on men's fertility, while still contested, appears to be a growing. A 2015systematic review of 90 studies identified age-associated declines in semen volume, percentage motility, progressive motility, normal morphology and unfragmented cells. Elsewhere,evidence suggests that advanced paternal age is also linked with increased risk of infertility, miscarriage and various pathological conditions in offspring. In addition, the 2013 NICE fertility guidelines reported that there was now evidence of declining male fertility with increasing age, for the first time.

All these developments point towards the need to take greater consideration of the role of men in reproductive timings (and in whether, when and why women opt to freeze their eggs) and related research both social and medical. If age does indeed play a role in men's fertility health, this needs to be taken into account in research, policy and practice.

Finally, we need to question why women's behaviours and reproductive 'choices' are routinely held to account in delayed childbearing, not men's; a greater focus on men will go some way to redress the balance. In 2013 Reproductive Biomedicine Online published a special issue on age-related fertility decline, beginning with the piece 'Cassandra's prophecy: why we need to tell the women of the future about age-related fertility decline and 'delayed' childbearing'. In the lively debate that followed, authors considered whether 'telling' women is sufficient, and grappled with how this complex issue can be addressed. Perhaps the recent media interest in men, age and fertility is a sign that the time for a full and frank debate about talking to men about age-related fertility decline both women's and men's - will soon be upon us.

Read more here:
Men, delayed childbearing and age-related fertility decline - BioNews

Veritas Genetics Scoops Up an AI Company to Sort Out Its DNA – WIRED

Genes carry the information that make you you. So it's fitting that, when sequenced and stored in a computer, your genome takes up gobs of memoryup to 150 gigabytes. Multiply that across all the people who have gotten sequenced, and you're looking at some serious storage issues. If that's not enough, mining those genomes for useful insight means comparing them all to each other, to medical histories, and to the millions of scientific papers about genetics.

Sorting all that out is a perfect task for artificial intelligence. And plenty of AI startups have bent their efforts in that direction. On August 3, sequencing company Veritas Genetics bought one of the most influential: seven-year old Curoverse. Veritas thinks AI will help interpret the genetic risk of certain diseases and scour the ever-growing databases of genomic, medical, and scientific research. In a step forward, the company also hopes to use things like natural language processing and deep learning to help customers query their genetic data on demand.

It's not totally surprising that Veritas bought up Curoverse. Both companies spun out of George Church's prolific Harvard lab. Several years ago, Church started something called the Personal Genomics Project, with the goal of sequencing 100,000 human genomesand linking each one to participants' health information. Veritas' founders helped lead the sequencing partstarting as a prenatal testing service and launching a $1,000 full genome product in 2015while Curoverse worked on academic strategies to store and sort through all the data.

But more broadly, genomics and AI practically call out for one another. As a raw data format, a single person's genome takes up about 150 gigabytes. How!?! OK so, yes, storing a single base pair only takes up around two bits. Multiply that by roughly 3 billionthe total number of base pairs in your 23 chromosome pairsand you wind up with around 750 megabytes. But genetic sequencing isn't perfect. Mirza Cifric, Veritas Genetics cofounder and CEO, says his company reads each part of the genome at least 30 times in order to make sure their results are statistically significant. "And you gotta keep all that data, so you can refer back to it over time," says Cifric.

That's just storage. "Everything after that is going to specific areas and asking questions: Theres a variant at this location, a substitution of this base, a deletion here, or multiple copies of this same gene here, here, and here," says Cifric. Now, interpret all that. Oh, and do it across a thousand, hundred thousand, or million genomes. Querying all those genetic variations is how scientists get leads to find new drugs, or figure out how existing drugs work differently on different people.

But cross-referencing all those genomes is just the beginning. Curoverse, which was focusing on projects to store and sort genomic data, also has its work cut out for it in searching through the 6 millionand countingjargon-filled academic papers detailing gene behavior, including visual information found in charts, graphs, and illustrations.

That's pretty ambitious. Natural language processing is one of the stickiest problems in AI. "Look, I am a computer scientist, I love AI and machine learning, and no amount of coding makes sense to solve this," says Atul Butte, the director of UCSF's Institute of Computational Health Sciences. At his former job at Stanford University, Butte actually tried to do the same thinguse AI to dig through genetics research. He says in the end, it was way cheaper to hire people to read the papers and input the findings into his database manually.

But hey, never say never, right? However they accomplish it, Veritas wants to move past what companies like 23andMe and Color offer: genetic risk based on single-variant diseases. Some of America's biggest dangers come from diseases like diabetes and heart disease, which are activated by interactions between multiple genesin addition to environmental factors like diet and exercise. With AI, Cifric believes Veritas will be able to not only dig up these various genetic contributors, but also assign each a statistical score showing how much it contributes to the overall risk.

Again, Butte hates to be a spoilsport, but ... there's all sorts of problems with doing predictive diagnostics with genetic data. He points to a 2013 study that used polygenic testing to predict heart disease using the Framingham Heart Study dataabout as good as you can get, when it comes to health data and heart disease. "They authors showed that yes, given polygenic risk score, and blood levels, and lipid levels, and family history, you can predict within 10 years if someone will develop heart disease," says Butte. "But doctors could do the same thing without using the genome!"

He says the problems come down to just how messy it is trying to square up all the different research on each gene alongside the environmental risks, and all the other compounding factors that come up when you try to peer into the future. "Its been the holy grail for a long time, structured genome reporting," says Butte. Even attempts to get researchers to write and report data in a standard, machine-readable way, have fallen flat. "You get into questions that never go away. One researcher defines autism different from another one, or high blood pressure, or any number of things," he says.

Butte isn't a total naysayer. He says partnerships like the one between Veritas and Curoverse are becoming more commonlike the data processing deal between genetic sequencing giant Illumina and IBM Watsonbecause there's a clear need for new computing methods in this area. "You want to get to a point where you are developing stuff that improves clinical care," he says.

Or how about directly to the owners of the genomes? Cifric hopes the merger will improve the consumer experience of using genetic data, even seamlessly integrating it into daily life. For instance, linking your genome and health records to your digital assistant. Alexa, should I eat this last piece of pizza? Maybe you should skip it, depending on your baseline genetic risk for cholesterol and latest blood test results. Diet isn't the only area where genomics could help improve your day to day life. Some people are more or less sensitive to over the counter drugs. A quick query might tell you whether you should take a little less Tylenol than is recommended.

Cifric thinks this acquisition could position Veritas as a global powerhouse of genomic data. "Apple recently announced that they had shipped 41 million iPhones in a quarter, right? I think in not too distant future, well be doing 41 million genomes in a quarter," he says. That might seem ambitious, given that the cost to consumers is nearly $1,000. But that cost is bound to come down. And artificial intelligence will make paying for the genome a matter of common sense.

This story has been updated to reflect that the company is named Veritas Genetics, not Veritas Genomics.

The rest is here:
Veritas Genetics Scoops Up an AI Company to Sort Out Its DNA - WIRED