The following editorial appeared in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on Monday, Aug. 28.

In his 2010 book I Live in the Future & Heres How It Works, the technology writer Nick Bilton relayed anecdotes about early 19th-century anxieties in Britain at the dawn of train travel. It was thought that people would asphyxiate if carried at speeds of more than 20 mph and reputable scientists believed that traveling at a certain speed could actually make our bones fall apart. So far, that hasnt happened. While adjusting to the future is often alarming, as Bilton illustrated, humans find a way to cope.

A recent article in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette drove that point home. Doctors have identified the condition of text neck, found most often in teenagers and young adults who stare down at their smartphones for two to four hours a day. An orthopedic surgeon quoted in the article advises people to simply take a break from that thing. If that proves unrealistic, theres a Pilates class geared for teenagers, which includes a focus on overcoming text neck. The instructor noticed that four girls in a recent class could not drop their heads in a relaxed position during the exercises a clear sign of TN.

It is beyond doubt that the proliferation of digital devices is changing the way people process information: smaller gulps from wider sources, less sustained attention. When you can pry your hands from your own smartphone for a minute, go ahead and wring them over this decline in intellectual capacity. But the endurance of the human species is testimony to its remarkable ability to adapt. And theres one constant: Each generation is horrified by the decadence of the one following.

The fork ratings are based primarily on food quality and preparation, with service and atmosphere factored into the final decision. Reviews are based on one unsolicited, unannounced visit to the restaurant.

See the original post here:
The Daily News | Watch your neck: Physiology and the advent of the ... - The Daily News Online

LAS VEGAS Conor McGregors transition from MMA fighter to boxer is not just about going from being able to kick, grapple and wrestle to only being allowed to punch. Its about altering his cardiovascular conditioning.

In MMA, the UFC lightweight champion has to fight for five rounds in five-minute bursts. For boxing, in this mega fight with Floyd Mayweather on Saturday night, McGregor is facing 12 rounds at three minutes per round.

To prepare for such a gigantic change, McGregor has been training at the UFC Performance Institute here on the promotions gorgeous new corporate campus. In addition to the work McGregor has done with his martial arts trainers, like John Kavanagh, Owen Roddy and others, he has been utilizing the technology available to him at the Performance Institute to alter his cardio.

Its kind of common knowledge through social media and things like that, Conor has used our altitude chamber extensively, UFC Performance Institute vice president of performance Duncan French told MMA Fighting. Ultimately what hes trying to do is change his physiology somewhat. If you look at the work-rest ratio of boxing, its about 3-to-1. If you look at the work-rest ratio of a UFC fight, its about 1-to-4. It completely flips the physiology on its head, right? Which means Conor has kind of adapted his physiology to 12, three-minute rounds rather than five, five-minute rounds.

Things like just doing the interval work that hes been doing in the hypoxic (altitude) chamber is gonna try and help his physiology to support that. Hes used the altitude chamber extensively. A lot of his workouts are based on heart-rate assessment and looking at high-level threshold training.

The way French, who has experience with the University of Notre Dame athletic program and Great Britain national boxing and taekwondo teams, explains it like this: A two-minute interval is half aerobic exercise and half anaerobic. Aerobic means with oxygen, while anaerobic means without oxygen. Anaerobic is the kind of exercise, like weight lifting or sprints, where you get out of breath quickly due to the intensity.

As the length of time increases, French said, those percentages lean toward aerobic. Three minutes is 60 percent aerobic and 40 percent anaerobic, he said, and six minutes would be more like 75 percent aerobic and 25 percent anaerobic. In other words, McGregor has been focusing on those intense, short bursts or anaerobic exercise to simulate the shorter rounds in boxing.

Thats a big piece of it, French said. Youve gotta to switch up the nature of your interval work that you do, high-intensity efforts for short work intervals and the emphasis not so much on some of the strength work that goes with grappling and wrestling and the ground fighting in MMA.

Also in the lead up to this fight, McGregor has touted his F.A.S.T. Conditioning program, which emphasizes both high intensity interval type (H.I.T.) training and longer aerobic type workout sessions which are done at specific heart rate zones, per its website. The UFC lightweight champion has been able to implement that plan at the UFC PI.

McGregor, 29, tore his ACL in a fight against Max Holloway in 2013 and injured it again before fighting Chad Mendes two years ago. So running outdoors road work in training parlance might not be the best fit for him, from a medical standpoint. Thats where the UFC PI, and its underwater treadmill, has come in. Being able to run under water takes the stress off an athletes tendons, ligaments and joints.

Its common knowledge that he has had an ACL injury in the past and hes not a big fan of road work and running, French said. He likes cycling and rowing, in particular. But what we were able to do is using the buoyancy of our underwater treadmill, he felt really confident in doing that cardiovascular workout without the stresses and the rigors normal running would place on his body.

For recovery, McGregor was a frequent user of the UFC PIs cryotherapy technology and its laser light therapy pod. French said he used both extensively over the last six weeks that hes been in Las Vegas after coming off the MayMac World Tour.

Combat sports are a race to recover, right? French said. So in a six-week training camp, its about how you not only train and optimize your training, but that recovery speed means you can come back the next day and train hard again. Thats been a great tool that he wouldn't have otherwise had in his usual training facility in Las Vegas.

If McGregor and Mayweather booked a fight earlier this year, McGregor would not have had use of the brand new Performance Institute, which only opened in May. French believes McGregors time at the UFC PI will manifest itself in the bout in a meaningful and positive way.

We hope it does and we surely believe it will, French said. And I think that comes back to capabilities. The UFC Performance Institute offers Conor capabilities that he wouldnt have otherwise have in his regular training facility. Hes embraced those. Hes an athlete thats very in tune with his body. Hes in great shape, hes ready for the fight of his life. And hes prepared effectively and used every piece of our capability that he wanted to to help him in this process.

Excerpt from:
UFC Performance Institute VP on how Conor McGregor tried to 'change his physiology' for boxing - MMA Fighting

Do you remember Rocky IV? It had some legendary training sequences. Sylvester Stallone grew a beard and he depicted Rocky going back to savage basics. He ran through snow, pushed plows, jerked on ropes, he had to get primal to fight his opponent. All this was set up to juxtapose Ivan Drago in a state-of-the-art facility, with cords hooked up to him while he was attached to lifting machines. Doctors were even there recording every result and change in his body. Thats kind of what Conor McGregor was doing down at the UFC Performance Institute to push himself to the next level in preparation for Floyd Mayweather.

Its kind of common knowledge through social media and things like that, Conor has used our altitude chamber extensively. Ultimately what hes trying to do is change his physiology somewhat. If you look at the work-rest ratio of boxing, its about 3-to-1. If you look at the work-rest ratio of a UFC fight, its about 1-to-4. It completely flips the physiology on its head, right? Which means Conor has kind of adapted his physiology to 12, three-minute rounds rather than five, five-minute rounds. UFC Performance Institute vice president of performance Duncan French speaking to MMA Fighting.

Things like just doing the interval work that hes been doing in the hypoxic [altitude] chamber is going to try and help his physiology to support that. Hes used the altitude chamber extensively. A lot of his workouts are based on heart-rate assessment and looking at high-level threshold training.

Running underwater, training in hypoxic chambers, bigger, stronger, faster. This is what Conor McGregor was aiming for. He combined this new training with the F.A.S.T. (Fighter Anaerobic/Aerobic System of Training) program his team developed with an Irish cyclist and a physiologist to get ready for Nate Diaz. His last fight with Diaz proved way different than the first, McGregor attributed that to his new program. Duncan French, the VP of UFCs Performance Institute, believes his time there will also result in visible pay-offs in the fight with Mayweather. Well find out if it did in just a few, short hours.

We hope it does and we surely believe it will, and I think that comes back to capabilities. The UFC Performance Institute offers Conor capabilities that he wouldnt have otherwise have in his regular training facility. Hes embraced those. Hes an athlete thats very in tune with his body. Hes in great shape, hes ready for the fight of his life. And hes prepared effectively and used every piece of our capability that he wanted to to help him in this process.

This article first appeared onBJPenn.comon 8/26/2017.

Follow this link:
Conor McGregor Completely Changed His Physiology for Fight With Mayweather - BJPenn.com (press release) (blog)

A cell biology journal has retracted a 2016 paper after an investigation revealed that the corresponding author failed to include two co-authors and acknowledge the funding source.

According to the retraction notice, the Journal of Cellular Physiology retracted the paper after the University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center found that last author Jin Wang had omitted two researchers from the list of authors, and had also failed to acknowledge funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH).

But Wang tells a different story.

Wang, who worked at the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston until 2015 but now runs his own lab at Fudan University in Shanghai, told us that he wrote the paper by himself and only asked his former mentor at MD Anderson, Subrata Sen, for English language edits. Wang also said that the research was not funded by the NIH and that one researcher mentioned in the notice, Ann Killary, played no role in the work and thus should not have been an author.

Heres the retraction notice for Identification of Novel Biomarkers for Pancreatic Cancer Using Integrated Transcriptomics With Functional Pathways Analysis:

The above article from the Journal of Cellular Physiology, published online on 10 March 2016 in Wiley Online Library as Early View (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/enhanced/doi/10.1002/jcp.25353/), has been retracted by agreement between Gary Stein, the journals Editor-in-Chief, and Wiley Periodicals, Inc. The retraction has been agreed following an investigation at the University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, which confirmed that the article was submitted and approved for publication by Dr. Jin Wang without acknowledgement of NIH funding received or the consent and authorship of Dr. Ann Killary and Dr. Subrata Sen, with whom the manuscript was originally drafted.

The paper has not yet been indexed by Clarivate Analytics Web of Science.

Wang explained that he worked as a postdoc in Sens lab at MD Anderson for almost seven years, and left the lab around May 2015. Before leaving, Wang said he sent Sen a draft of the paper to edit for language, not content. Wang said he also sent the paper to others for English editing and does not think Sens corrections warranted authorship. The paper was received by the journal in February 2016 and published online the following month.

Wang added:

By the way, Dr. Killary had never read this manuscript. We do not understand why and who said she had drafted this manuscript.

The papers acknowledgement section does not acknowledge Sen or Killary. It only calls out grant support received from the Shanghai Science and Technology Commission.

We reached out to both Sen and Killary for a response to Wangs remarks. We also contacted the institutions provost and compliance officer to ask for a copy of the investigation report. A spokesperson from MD Anderson Cancer Center got back to us with a statement:

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center is committed to the highest standards of scientific integrity and supports the Journal of Cellular Physiology for retracting the article, Identification of Novel Biomarkers for Pancreatic Cancer Using Integrated Transcriptomics with Functional Pathways Analysis.

Between2010 and 2015, Killary and Sen received more than $3.2 million in NIH grants to support their research identifying early biomarkers in pancreatic cancer. Although we do not know for sure whether the funding also covered the research in the Journal of Cellular Physiology paper, the projects focus on similar topics.

Sen was also a middle author on a2004 Journal of Biological Chemistry paper co-authored byHarvards Sam Lee, which wasretracted in 2015 after an investigation at the Roswell Park Cancer Institute uncovered data manipulation.

Conflicts over authorship have led to many problems in the literature. For instance, we recently explored how the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) authorship guidelines which recommend that any author included on a paper should have made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work ended a 20-year collaboration.

Hat tip: Kerry Grens

Like Retraction Watch? Consider making a tax-deductible contribution to support our growth. You can also follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, sign up on our homepage for an email every time theres a new post, or subscribe to our daily digest. Click here to review our Comments Policy. For a sneak peek at what were working on, click here.

Related

Read the original here:
Former MD Anderson researcher objects to retraction of his paper - Retraction Watch (blog)

Its not every day you can stumble into a tent on Eastern Avenue and learn how to improve your sex life. Luckily for us, sex therapist and media personality, Tanya Koens, laid bare the juicy deets on what makes sex fun, freeing and fulfilling last week. Tanya kicked off the University of Sydney Unions Radical Sex and Consent Week with a bang (pun certainly intended).

Ive never seen a room of USyd students more attentive than during Tanyas overview of the different male and female erogenous zones. Let me tell you, the list aint short. In fact, there are 40 parts on a female body that can cause orgasm. 40! I thought mastering one was challenging enough

What I found most striking from Tanyas talk was that it takes men and women the same amount of time to orgasm when masturbating in fact, just like the title of Justin Timberlake and Madonnas delectable 2008 pop collaboration, it only takes four minutes. I dont think they were talking about masturbating, but its a coincidence I just cant ignore.

However, despite the mutual four minutes it takes to climax while doin it solo, in partnered sex its a very different story. To reach orgasm with someone else, it typically takes males five and a half minutes compared to the 17 minutes for females.

Im no Einstein, but thats a pretty notable gap. So if women are physiologically capable of reaching orgasm as quickly as men, why is it that it takes us ladies so much longer to climax when were with a partner? According to Tanya, there a multitude of reasons.

For women, desire and arousal are wholly controlled by the brain, which controls the rest of our body. When women are with a partner, it can take more time to relax and trigger arousal in the brain, and thus blood flow in the vagina and other erogenous zones. Although this can be impacted by things like stress, nervousness, self-esteem issues, past experiences, and physical impairment (to name a few), it still takes women a little more time to become fully aroused in the absence of these factors.

As our personal sexpert suggested, whats important is that we take things nice and slow. Take time to touch each others entire bodies before going straight for the bullseye. After all, why rush to dessert when you can have a multi-course degustation?

Of equal importance, Tanya re-iterated what youve probably already heard several times before: communication is key. Making an effort to talk to your partner and find out what they like can go a long way. Before getting physical, connect with each other mentally first by using your words, she says. Who knew it was that simple?

On top of this gender imbalance in the time it takes to orgasm, when it comes to hook-up sex, the stats are even more divided. On average, a mere 4 per cent of women orgasm compared to a whopping 85 per cent of men. The rate of orgasm increases with the number of hook-ups between the pair, presumably because both parties get to know each other better. Clearly, communication and comfort have a lot to do with reaching the big O.

As alarming as this orgasm gap is, fear not! Tanya reminded us that reaching orgasm isnt the be all and end all of good sex. Dont make sex outcome focussed, she advised. Sex is about the journey, not the destination. That goes for everyone: so long as youre having fun, thats all that really matters in the end!

Content note: Some Rad Sex coverage uses language that reinforces the gender binary to reflect the content of reviewed events.Honiunderstands that this does not represent the identities of all our readers.

Here is the original post:
Review: The physiology of pleasure - Honi Soit

Michigan State University researcher Kevin Haudek is the lead investigator of a three-year, $485,000 National Science Foundation that develops learning progressions and evaluates principle-based reasoning in undergraduate physiology students.

Principle-based reasoning is a practice of mind used by scientists to approach problems and constrain the boundaries of problems.

We believe that using such principles will help students think more like a scientist, said Haudek, an assistant professor in the MSU Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology in the College of Natural Science.

When students are able to demonstrate principle-based reasoning, they are capable of accurately predicting outcomes to disturbances of a system. Too often, the reliance on rote memorization rather than principle-based reasoning to solve problems, leads to context-bound thinking that fails to build robust understandings, which limits students ability to excel in the sciences.

The project is a cross-disciplinary collaboration between MSU researchers Joyce Parker in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, John Merrill in the Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, Mark Urban-Lurain in the CREATE for STEM Institute at MSU and researchers at the University of Washington.

The grant proposes to create the first learning progression in undergraduate physiology focusing on flux and mass balances core concepts.

Our learning progression will guide the creation of assessments instructors can use to determine where their students are along the spectrum of understanding, Haudek said.

When designing assessments, researchers and instructors must choose between constructed response and multiple-choice formats. Haudek noted the project will focus on the development of CR assessments and the evaluation of these assessments using computerized scoring methods.

We believe CR assessments have certain advantages, which is why wed like to develop these types of assessment items and framed in a whole new content area, he said.

Another aim of the grant is to begin to gather information about national trends in student learning of physiology during two and four-year programs.

The results of this aim may indicate that some gaps or plateaus of improvement might exist over the course of a curricular program, Haudek said.

Haudek and his colleagues are hopeful the project will positively impact a variety of science-based programs since physiology intersects with so many other degrees and career paths.

Although the project is not structured for the purpose of specifically addressing issues related to curricular gaps, Haudek said, one outcome of the study may be that some departments and programs become more self-reflective in the way students understanding of course content is evaluated, thus prompting changes in instruction, courses and or programs."

SOURCE: MSU Today

Go here to read the rest:
NSF grant supports project to improve undergraduate physiology curriculum - WSYM-TV

Michigan State University researcher Kevin Haudek is the lead investigator of a three-year, $485,000 National Science Foundation that develops learning progressions and evaluates principle-based reasoning in undergraduate physiology students.

Principle-based reasoning is a practice of mind used by scientists to approach problems and constrain the boundaries of problems.

We believe that using such principles will help students think more like a scientist, said Haudek, an assistant professor in the MSU Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology in the College of Natural Science.

When students are able to demonstrate principle-based reasoning, they are capable of accurately predicting outcomes to disturbances of a system. Too often, the reliance on rote memorization rather than principle-based reasoning to solve problems, leads to context-bound thinking that fails to build robust understandings, which limits students ability to excel in the sciences.

The project is a cross-disciplinary collaboration between MSU researchers Joyce Parker in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, John Merrill in the Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, Mark Urban-Lurain in the CREATE for STEM Institute at MSU and researchers at the University of Washington.

The grant proposes to create the first learning progression in undergraduate physiology focusing on flux and mass balances core concepts.

Our learning progression will guide the creation of assessments instructors can use to determine where their students are along the spectrum of understanding, Haudek said.

When designing assessments, researchers and instructors must choose between constructed response and multiple-choice formats. Haudek noted the project will focus on the development of CR assessments and the evaluation of these assessments using computerized scoring methods.

We believe CR assessments have certain advantages, which is why wed like to develop these types of assessment items and framed in a whole new content area, he said.

Another aim of the grant is to begin to gather information about national trends in student learning of physiology during two and four-year programs.

The results of this aim may indicate that some gaps or plateaus of improvement might exist over the course of a curricular program, Haudek said.

Haudek and his colleagues are hopeful the project will positively impact a variety of science-based programs since physiology intersects with so many other degrees and career paths.

Although the project is not structured for the purpose of specifically addressing issues related to curricular gaps, Haudek said, one outcome of the study may be that some departments and programs become more self-reflective in the way students understanding of course content is evaluated, thus prompting changes in instruction, courses and or programs."

See the rest here:
NSF grant supports project to improve undergraduate physiology curriculum - MSUToday

The white supremacist and neo-Nazi protesters in Charlottesville, Virginia, hold vile and abhorrent views, and they should be condemned in the strongest terms by all political, business, and civic leaders. That these poisonous views spilled over into the killing of Heather Heyer shows how odious ideas can metastasize through a crowd. But before hatred manifests into violence, it must first be conceived, processed and perceived in the brain. Understanding the physiological and evolutionary underpinnings of hate within this organ might offer clues as to what drove the protesters in Charlottesville to act in such a repulsive manner.

The brain has a circuit that activates when it processes hatred. In neuroscience parlance, this circuit is composed of the right putamen, medial frontal gyrus, premotor cortex and medial insula, according to a University College London study, in which researchers scanned the brains of participants as they looked at images of those they professed to hate. The researchers discovered that these brain regions show significant activity. Parts of this hate circuit are also known to activate during acts of aggression. It isnt remarkable that hatred and hostility share similar neural correlates. But its physiological evidence that the distance between scorn and savagery can be measured not just in the size of crowds but the pathways of neurons. When David Duke explicitly and Donald Trump tacitly stoke hatred, they may be triggering the brains hate circuit which can readily crackle into violent behavior.

The hate circuit may even override empathy. In a study by Stanford neuroscientist David Eagleman, the brains of participants were scanned while they watched as six hands on a screen were randomly swabbed with cotton or stabbed with a needle. When people witnessed the hands that were punctured by the syringe, the regions of their brains associated with pain activated. They felt empathy. The study was then replicated and each hand was displayed with a one-word religious label such as atheist, Christian, Jew or Muslim. When participants saw the hands being stabbed of those who shared their religious affiliations, their brains on average showed more activity in the regions known for empathy. Even atheists were more empathetic towards fellow atheists. As concludes Eagleman in his book The Brain: The Story of You: Its about which team youre on.

Daily Emails and Alerts - Get the best of Newsweek delivered to your inbox

Related: My life as a white supremacist

White supremacists clash with counterprotesters at a rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, on August 12. Joshua Roberts/Reuters

While people have historically formed teams to survive, such tribalism can dull empathy and fuel hatred towards others. The white supremacists and other right wing extremists who mobilized in Charlottesville were demonstrating hate. But they are hateful and angry because theyre afraid. They fear that their team is losing significance in our country. A majority of children in the United States will be non-white by 2020. The overall non-white minority is projected to increase from 38 percent of the total population to 56 percent in 2060. The white supremacists are troubled by the rise of the other teams such as minorities and immigrants and may resort to violence in order to spread fear.

When President Donald Trump doesnt outright reject the white nationalist worldview, he implicitly condones those who have brains full of hate. When he retweets the opinions of white supremacists, he further stokes intolerance. When he castigates immigrants and implements religious-based travel bans, he provokes xenophobia and an us against them mentality. And because we increasingly see ourselves on different teams, its ever more difficult for our brains to register empathy towards each other.

As our leader, President Trump has a moral responsibility to do more to call out and condemn bigotrybefore it creates greater barriers between Americans. Throughout history, hatred has resulted in internecine battles that have splintered countries, the United States included. With a hateful brain, its almost impossible to obtain what we most needan open mind.

Deepak Chopra and Kabir Sehgal created Home: Where Everyone Is Welcome, a book of poems and album of songs inspired by American immigrants.

Follow this link:
Your Brain on Hate: Charlottesville, Trump and the Physiology of Loathing - Newsweek

A lecturer at the Ambrose Alli University has given students and fellow lecturers a night to remember after he proposed to his girlfriend at a school dinner.

The lecturer identified as Ernest Nwoke is the Head of Department (HOD) of Physiology in the prestigious school.

NAIJ.com gathered that the lecturer was once married but he lost his wife years ago.

AAU's Physiology HOD proposes to his girlfriend during his students' dinner

He found love again in the young lady who he proposed to on the night of a school dinner for his students.

It was gathered that Nwoke surprised his girlfriends by getting down on one the knee to propose in the midst of other lecturers and students in attendance.

The couple embraced each other after the lady accepted Nwokes romantic proposal.

Meanwhile, NAIJ.com TV went to the street to ask people what men want from women:

More here:
AAU's Physiology HOD proposes to his girlfriend during students ... - NAIJ.COM

The head of Department of the Physiology Department, Ambrose Alli Unversity, Dr Ernest Nwoke, proposes to his girlfriend at the student dinner night.

It was a night to be remembered as the student and lecturers present were amazed with the expression of love be from the Pragmatic HOD, Dr Ernest Nwoke.

According to reports, Nwoke lost his wife and has found love again in the pretty young lady.

Congratulations to the couple.

Read this article:
AAU Physiology HOD Proposes To Girlfriend At Student Dinner Night - Information Nigeria