To the stars and beyond: A hundred years of Isaac Asimov – Hindustan Times

In a completely unscientific survey I conducted for the express purpose of writing this article, I sent a WhatsApp message to many of my (what I hoped were) sci-fi reading friends asking what they thought Asimovs greatest work (or their favourite Asimov work) was. The answers did not surprise me; there was absolutely no consensus. Everyone who had read Asimov had a different answer. Bicentennial Man and End of Eternity FTW! replied one. Some would say the Robot stories, but Foundation is more in-depth, answered another. Robot Dreams, said a third; his short stories definitelyespecially the AI ones, pinged a fourth; Nightfall. No questions there! said a fifth with complete confidenceand so on.

Of course, there was also one who said whos Asimov? Horrified, I explained that he was an acclaimed writer whose work had been made into several movies. Havent you seen I, Robot? I asked. Is that the one with Rajinikanth? came the tentative reply.

Message received. Asimov isnt everyones cup of tea.

But for those of us who revel in the scientific accuracy of fantastic worlds, in the possibility of reimagining the mundane into never-impossible futures, and found ways of thinking about the Big Questions of life through the stories of Multivac and lands where stars were only seen once in a thousand years, Isaac Asimov is a prophet (peace be upon his name).

A Russian immigrant in the USA in the 1930s, a professor of biochemistry, a war veteran, and a writer of popular science books, Isaac Asimov whose birth centenary it was on 02 January was also, possibly, the most successful science fiction writer of his generation.

His mind-bending stories of inter-stellar travel, other worlds, strange encounters, and sentient machines have never stopped fascinating readers since he first put finger to typewriter. One of the most prolific of writers, he has authored more than 500 books, edited several volumes, and all of this while also being a professor of biochemistry.

Born in a village called Petrovichi in Smolensk, Russia somewhere between October 1919 and January 1920, Isaac Asimov decided to celebrate his birthday on 02 January. He wrote in In Memory Yet Green, It could not have been later than that... There is, however, no way of finding out. My parents were always uncertain and it really doesnt matter. I celebrate January 2, 1920, so let it be.

The Asimovs emigrated to the USA in 1922, and after struggling for three years, managed to save enough money to open a small candy store in New York. It was there that a young Isaac discovered science fiction in the form of magazines lying around in the store and also discovered the incomparable joy of reading and getting lost in the pages of a good book.

Isaac Asimov discovered he was a storyteller in school, and soon even before he had turned 12 was already trying his hand at writing them. He also wrote a detailed daily journal, complete with baseball scores, and had a dedicated following as a teller of tales he had read in magazines and books. But before he ever wrote science fiction, as a teenager, he had first tried his hand at fantasy.

In Its Been a Good Life a compilation of Asimovs diary entries, personal communications, and a condensation of his earlier autobiographies he writes about the first piece of fiction he ever attempted to write on the used typewriter his father had bought him: (it was a story of) a group of men wandering on some quest through a universe in which there were elves, dwarves, and wizards, and in which magic worked.

This was in the year 1935. Asimov was 15, and JRR Tolkiens The Hobbit wasnt published till 1937 (The Lord of Rings trilogy, which pretty much set the template for fantasy fiction for the next several decades, would only be published twenty years later between July 1954 and October 1955). It was as though I had some premonition of JRR Tolkiens Lord of The Rings, writes Asimov. But for better or worse, it didnt stick.

By the mid-1930s, Asimov was an avowed sci-fi fan, writing letters to science fiction magazines and even joining fab clubs. And by 1938, as an undergraduate chemistry major at Columbia University, he had written his first complete science fiction story and went to the New York offices of the Astounding Science Fiction magazine to meet the editor and submit it for publication. The Editor John Campbell, who is credited with having found and nurtured an entire generation of science fiction writers, and went on to become Asimovs trusted friend and editor for many years to come rejected the piece, with a cordial letter that explained to the young Asimov why the story didnt work and how he could get better. It would take nine more rejections before Asimov was finally published in another magazine called Amazing Stories.

For a writer so dedicated to his craft and one who wrote as much as he did, it took Asimov another twenty years to be able to earn enough to live off writing full time. In the meanwhile, he finished his Bachelor of Science degree, spent three years as a civilian chemist in World War II in Philadelphia, returned to New York and earned his doctorate in chemistry, and got a job as professor of biochemistry in Boston.

Till then and after, he wrote some of science fictions best loved stories. Stories of 200 year old robots who wanted to be human (The Bicentennial Man); of elections in an age where computers could predict the mood of the nation with a sample size of one (Franchise); of super computers who had all the knowledge of the world, and couldnt yet answer one important question (The Last Question), and a history of a future in which a great civilisation came to an end (Foundation)

But he was more than just a teller of made up stories. He was really invested in the science he wrote about, and the great pains he took to keep the science realistic in his stories is matched only by the pleasure he took in the research of it all. The simple evidence of how deeply he cared about the science of his stories is in the number of nonfiction books he wrote. He was as proud of being a science writer as he was of being a science fiction writer. Having written on subjects as varied as nuclear physics and human biology; Asimov the polymath is the poster child of multi-disciplinarity and academia as at ease in the hard sciences as in sociology and history; as eager to learn and read when he became a full professor as he was as a teenager; and able to write in a clear and concise manner in fiction and science.

An atheist all his life, Asimov was a member of the humanist movement, and believed that human beings are responsible for the progressive advancement of society, and must step up and alleviate the ills of society themselves, instead of depending on supernatural forces. He even went so far as to sign the Humanist Manifesto in 1970. His two volume Asimovs Guide to the Bible is also written from a strictly humanist point of view.

It is a vision reflected in his stories, in his hopes for possible futures. In 1984 35 years after George Orwells grim book of that name was published Asimov was asked by the Toronto Star to predict what the world might look like 35 years from then (in 2019), and he managed to get quite a bit right. Even though we havent come to a point where we can live under the faint semblance of a world government by co-operation and we havent shifted polluting industries in a wholesale manner to space; he did foresee the human races increasing reliance on computers and predicted that mobile computerised objects would penetrate the home. He also predicted that there would have to be a vast change in the nature of education because wed have to learn to live in an increasingly high tech world.

Asimov, above all, was an optimist someone who was sure that the inherent good in enough members of the human race would outrun the evil forces and keep humans going for millennia to come. Oh the robots we would build! And the galaxies we would colonise! What adventures we would have! It is a world view that recognises the challenges of war and natural disasters and discrimination; but it is filled with hope for a better future, a fantastic future, a kinder future.

Isaac Asimov was possibly the most successful science fiction writer of his time.(Getty Images)

Little Known Facts About Isaac Asimov1. When Isaac Asimov was about two years old, 17 children in his village, including Isaac, contracted double pneumonia a disease in which both lungs become inflamed, making it near impossible to breathe. All but Isaac died. He credits his survival to his mother, who after the doctor had given up on him, held baby Isaac in her arms without ever letting go until he was better.

2. Though he wrote extensively about interstellar travel, Asimov was afraid of flying, and almost never took flights.

3. Asimov was fond of music and thought of Tchaikovsky as music that makes me feel happy and Beethoven as music that makes me feel awed.

4. He wrote more than science and science fiction! Asimovs Guide To The Bible was written in two volumes in 1968 and 1969. And in 1970, he wrote Asimovs Guide To Shakespeare. He organised the plays not as tragedies, comedies, and histories (as is usually done) but by region Greek, Roman, Italian, English. Other than writing his autobiographies, Asimovs Guide To Shakespeare was according to him the most pleasant work Ive ever done.

5. Paul McCartney, in 1974, asked Asimov if he would write a screenplay for a science fictional movie musical about a band whose members were being impersonated by aliens. Asimov wrote it, but it was never made (speculation is that it had been rejected because Asimov neglected to use the scraps of dialogue that McCartney had suggested).

6. Apart from his own (what he called legitimate) PhD, Asimov was awarded 14 honorary doctorates in his lifetime.

7. When Asimov had a triple bypass surgery in 1983, he contracted HIV from a bad blood transfusion. In 1990, Asimov and his wife Janet Jeppson Asimov found out about it but they did not go public with this information on the advice of his doctors. It was not revealed even when he died in 1992 of heart and kidney failure caused by AIDS. The truth came to light in 2002, when Janet revealed it in the epilogue to Its Been A Good Life.

8. In September 1983, Asimov met Indira Gandhi, when she was in New York City to attend the UN General Assembly. She was a gracious and intelligent woman, he wrote about the meeting.

9. A fan of Sherlock Holmes, Asimov was a member of the official fan club The Baker Street Irregulars; and even wrote a song (to be sung to the tune of Danny Boy) in praise of the detective for an annual dinner of the club. The first few lines were: Oh, Sherlock Holmes, the Baker Street Irregulars/ Are Gathered here to honour you today,/ For in their hearts you glitter like a thousand stars,/And like the stars, youll never fade away.

The Laws Of RoboticsOne of Asimovs most memorable contributions to the world are his Three Laws of Robotics. While scientists and others have written their own laws since, Asimovs were the first, most popular, and remain at the heart of all other laws of robotics. They have also formed the bedrock of much of sci-fi involving robots. Many writers have written stories, simply assuming the laws as fact.The Laws as Asimov wrote them:1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the first law.

3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the first or second laws.

Asimov credits his friend and publisher John Campbell with having come up with them.

It was at a meeting between Asimov and Campbell where Campbell was actually rejecting one of Asimovs stories that the idea for the laws emerged. Asimov was pitching a story about a robot that had become capable of reading minds due to a minor mistake on the assembly line.

And as they talked of the complications that robot telepathy might present, Campbell said, Look, Asimov, in working this out, you have to realize that there are three rules that robots have to follow. In the first place, they cant do any harm to human beings; in the second place, they have to obey orders without doing harm; in the third, they have to protect themselves, without doing harm or proving disobedient. Well ...

The Writers Personal FavouritesIn 1968, Asimovs story Nightfall was voted the best science fiction short story ever written, by the Science Fiction Writers of America, and many think that honour still holds.

But what were Asimovs favourites from among his own work?

Helpfully, he has answered the question himself. His own three favourite short stories were, in descending order:

(1) The Last Question

(2) The Bicentennial Man

(3) The Ugly Little Boy

See original here:
To the stars and beyond: A hundred years of Isaac Asimov - Hindustan Times

PROBE conference to reflect on incredible role of physiology in life sciences – The News International

PROBE conference to reflect on incredible role of physiology in life sciences

The Department of Physiology at the University of Karachi is holding a three-day PROBE (Physiology Resonates and Ozonizes Biological Existence) 2020 Conference from Tuesday. Sindh Women Development Minister Syeda Shehla Raza will be the chief guest of the inaugural session.

KU Department of Physiology Chairman Prof Dr Taseer Ahmed said researchers and scholars will attend the biennial scientific meet-up. He said PROBE includes keynote sessions, plenary lectures, and oral and poster presentations. Themed Molecules to Mechanisms, the conference will reflect on the contemplative and incredible role of physiology in life sciences.

Dr Ahmed said the conference will be inaugurated at 3pm by KU Vice-Chancellor Prof Dr Khalid Mahmood Iraqi, and it will be attended by Minister Shehla, also an alumnus of the department.

Among other guests will be Pakistan Medical Commission member Prof Dr Rumina Hasan, former KU VC and physiology alumnus Prof Dr Pirzada Qasim, and world renowned scientists, including former Pakistan Council for Science & Technology chairman Prof Dr Anwarul Hasan Gilani and Prof Dr Ahsana Dar Farooq.

Dr Ahmed said students and intellectuals from nationwide institutions, including the Bahauddin Zakria University (Multan), the Islamia University (Bahawalpur), the University of Health Sciences (Lahore) and the University of Sindh (Jamshoro), are participating in PROBE.

Four pre-conference workshops will be conducted on Monday, namely Medical Social Work: An Opportunistic Field, A Hidden Treasure, Structural Bioinformatics: Discover the World Unknown to Many, Handling, Ethics and Ultrasound Applications on Laboratory Animals, and Life in Vivo: Non-Invasive Lab Techniques in Physiology.

The conference is partnered with the Pakistan Physiological Society and the South Asian Association of Physiologists. Dr Ahmed said the event is supported by the Higher Education Commission Pakistan, the Pakistan Science Foundation, the Office of Research Innovation & Commercialisation, and the World Poultry Science Association.

Read the original here:
PROBE conference to reflect on incredible role of physiology in life sciences - The News International

Pune to host fifth edition of global Drosophila conference – The Hindu

The city is set to host the fifth edition of the Asia Pacific Drosophila Research Conference (APDRC5), which is being organised in the country for the first time by the Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (IISER).

This biennial conference, which is to be held between January 6 and 10, aims to promote the interaction of Drosophila researchers in the Asia-Pacific region with their peers in the rest of the world. It will bring together scientists from all over the world who use the fruit fly, Drosophila, as a model organism to address basic and applied questions.

Drosophila is one of the most widely-used and preferred model organisms in biological research across the world for the last 100 years. Several discoveries in biology have been made using this. Its genome is entirely sequenced and there is enormous information available about its biochemistry, physiology and behaviour, said professor (biology) Sutirth Dey of IISER.

The event will feature 430 delegates: 330 Indian and 100 foreign. It will see the participation of two Nobel laureates, professors Eric Wieschaus and Michael Rosbash, known for their seminal contribution to the fields of development biology and chronobiology respectively.

Prof. Wieschaus, an American evolutionary developmental biologist, shared the Nobel in Physiology in 1995 with Edward B. Lewis and Christiane Nsslein-Volhard for his work on genetic control of embryonic development, while Prof. Rosbash shared the Nobel in 2017 in Physiology along with Michael Young and Jeffrey Hall for their discoveries of molecular mechanisms controlling the circadian rhythm.

This event is one of the largest meetings of Drosophila researchers in the whole world and attracts scientists working in diverse disciplines ranging from cell and molecular biology to ecology and evolution, said Prof. Dey.

Explaining the choice by the APDRC board of IISER to organise the meet, he said the institute is one the premier scientific research institutes of the country and is very strong in Drosophila research, given that there are five professors and 30 Ph.D. scholars who were using Drosophila to answer questions in developmental biology.

A total 57 talks and 240 posters on topics ranging from gametogenesis and stem cells, morphogenesis and mechanobiology, hormones and physiology, cellular and behavioural neurobiology, infection and immunity and ecology and evolution are scheduled for the conference.

One of the highlights of this conference is that we are explicitly encouraging undergraduates from various institutes of the world to participate in it. There is a pre-conference symposium called signals from the gut in collaboration with the National Centre for Cell Science, as well as a pre-conference microscopy workshop on super-resolution microscopy. This will feature microscopes from fluorescence imaging to super resolution imaging (50 nm resolution) which are vital for certain kinds of fly work, Prof. Dey said.

The last four editions of this conference took place in Taipei, Seoul, Beijing and Osaka.

You have reached your limit for free articles this month.

Register to The Hindu for free and get unlimited access for 30 days.

Find mobile-friendly version of articles from the day's newspaper in one easy-to-read list.

Enjoy reading as many articles as you wish without any limitations.

A select list of articles that match your interests and tastes.

Move smoothly between articles as our pages load instantly.

A one-stop-shop for seeing the latest updates, and managing your preferences.

We brief you on the latest and most important developments, three times a day.

Not convinced? Know why you should pay for news.

*Our Digital Subscription plans do not currently include the e-paper ,crossword, iPhone, iPad mobile applications and print. Our plans enhance your reading experience.

Read the original:
Pune to host fifth edition of global Drosophila conference - The Hindu

Fast Talk, ep. 91: Beyond the datatraining is about more than just the numbers – VeloNews

There is great value in keeping track of your training data, but if you focus only on the numbers, you are missing out on very critical aspects of your training.

Happy New Years, Fast Talk friends!

We are excited to be speeding into 2020 with our new company, Fast Labs, and continuing our partnership with VeloNews. For starters, and due to popular demand, Fast Talk will now be a weekly show. These new bi-monthly bonus episodes will be a bit shorter than the traditional Fast Talk episode, but in them youll find similar, detailed scientific physiology explanations, special interviews with your favorite pros, coaches, and experts, and well also regularly answer your questions.

To that end, thank you to the listeners who called and left us a voicemail over the holidays. Well be recording a special listener questions episode in the next week, so make sure to get your questions in as soon as you can. The number to call is 719-800-2112. If we can hear you loud and clear in the message, we may include the recording in the show.

Now, episode 91. The focus of this episode can be summarized in a single, powerful sentiment: There is great value in keeping track of your numbers, at analyzing the data youve gathered with your power meter, heart rate strap, or other device, but if all you do is focus on the numbers, and make them the end-goal themselves, you are missing out on very critical aspects of your training.

So, the underlying message of episode 91 is simple: Think of the numbers not as the target or the goal, but as a tool. What we will emphasize today are the many critical aspects of training and coaching that dont show up in the data.

Our primary guest is a very successful former professional cyclist turned coach Julie Young, whose road racing career stretched over a decade with teams including Saturn and Timex. She continues to race today at a very high level across multiple disciplines, and is currently part of the talented team behind the Kaiser Permanente Sports Medicine Endurance Lab in California.

Were also joined by co-owner of The cycling Gym, Coach Steve Neal, as well as Trek-Segafredos Ruth Winder, the reigning American national champion on the road.

Now, set your preferred analytics software aside for a minute. Lets focus on you, your brain, and this moment. Lets make you fast!

View original post here:
Fast Talk, ep. 91: Beyond the datatraining is about more than just the numbers - VeloNews

UC Berkeley Researchers Restore Vision in Mice Through Gene Insertion – Gilmore Health News

Blind Mice Regain Vision After Gene Insertion in Trials

Loss of vision is one of the trickier health issues to deal with and is permanent in most cases. But research done at the University of California Berkeley suggests that people who have lost their eyesight might one day be able to see again.

Using a technique described as rather easy, researchers succeeded in helping mice regain their eyesight by inserting a gene into their eyes. The animals were able to detect motion and patterns as well as avoid obstacles within a month of receiving treatment.

Read Also: New Therapy Restores Vision Loss by Calming down Hyperactive Eye Cells

Around one in every 10 persons above the age of 55 suffers from age-related macular degeneration (AMD), according to estimates. Roughly 170 million people around the world have this disorder.

In addition, retinitis pigmentosa affects about 1.7 million people worldwide. Those who have this most-common form of inherited blindness typically become blind by age 40.

The best option currently available to people who have lost their vision is an electronic implant featuring a video camera. This is not only expensive but also does not deliver the finest results.

Researchers in the current study delivered a gene into the eyes of mice with the aid of an inactivated virus. This novel approach showed great promise of potentially being useful in the future to people with vision loss.

You would inject this virus into a persons eye and, a couple months later, theyd be seeing something, said Ehud Isacoff, a professor of molecular and cell biology at UC Berkeley. With neurodegenerative diseases of the retina, often all people try to do is halt or slow further degeneration. But something that restores an image in a few months it is an amazing thing to think about.

The research was reported in Nature Communications.

It is a thorny affair trying to rectify the genetic flaw that results in the degeneration of the retina. This is mainly because there are hundreds of genetic mutations involved. These mutations ensure that the vast majority of light-converting receptor cells in the retina die off.

Read Also: An Artificial Retina to Restore Sight Could Soon Become a Reality

Isacoff and John Flannery, also a professor of molecular and cell biology at UC Berkeley, had tried a variety of complex approaches over the years to restore vision with limited success. One of the techniques involved the insertion of genetically-engineered neurotransmitter receptors and light-sensitive switches into surviving eye cells.

Finally, the research team settled for a simpler approach of inserting a gene.

The scientists turned to the light-sensitive green cone opsins of photoreceptor cells. They delivered the gene for an opsin into the eye with the aid of an adeno-associated virus (AAV), which infects ganglion cells in the eye.

Usually, ganglion cells are not sensitive to light in blind people. But, in this study, they became light-sensitive after the virus moved the gene into them. The cells became able to send signals to the brain, which translates them into sight.

The researchers succeeded in making 90 percent of ganglion cells in mice sensitive to light in their trials. The animals performed comparatively well, visually, as their healthy counterparts as a result.

To the limits that we can test the mice, you cant tell the optogenetically-treated mices behavior from the normal mice without special equipment, said Flannery.

In mice that regained their eyesight, the vision lasted for their entire lifetime, the research team said.

It remains to be seen, however, whether the results can be replicated in humans. Scientists would require many more virus particles to make this possible because the human eye contains way more ganglion cells.

Isacoff and Flannery did admit that some people might doubt whether opsins can function outside their specialized photoreceptor cells. It is thought that opsins would not work elsewhere without transplanting the enzyme system responsible for recharging them.

Read Also: Age-related Close-up Vision Loss- How do I rid myself of reading glasses?

However, Isacoff theorized that an opsin would inevitably link to the retinal ganglion cells signaling system.

The researchers first tried rhodopsin in rods, being more light-sensitive than opsins in cones. This helped mice that were blind due to retinal degeneration to distinguish light from darkness. But rhodopsin failed in other aspects, including image recognition.

Finally, the team found that the green opsin in cones was 10 times more responsive than rhodopsin. It made the mice more sensitive that they could make out letters on an iPad.

The animals were able to make out and explore three-dimensional (3D) objects, a very common natural behavior. This means they could find their way around more easily.

The UC Berkeley team has fashioned a means of boosting viral delivery for possible use in humans. It aims to insert a light sensor into a high proportion of ganglion cells as done in the mice trials. The number of cells will be comparable to the incredibly high pixel count of a camera.

Isacoff and Flannery are trying to raise funds to assess the feasibility of this gene therapy in humans. They hope to be able to try it within three years in people who have lost their sight.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-09124-x

WHO Warning! Too Much Time Staring at a Screen Can Make You Nearsighted

Researchers Explain How Opsin 3 Is Related to Pigmentation Disorders

Prolonged Exposure to Blue Light Emitted from Smartphones and Computers Could Speed up Aging

See the original post here:
UC Berkeley Researchers Restore Vision in Mice Through Gene Insertion - Gilmore Health News

Smaller but Still Deadly: New Insights Into the Life of Teenage T. Rex – Gizmodo

A Tyrannosaurus rex skeleton on display at Washington Pavilions Kirby Science Discovery Center in Sioux Falls, San Diego. Image: AP

Tyrannosaurus rex was among the most fearsome carnivores to have ever lived, but this killer still had to endure an adolescent phase. Far from being awkward, however, these teenage titans managed to pack a tremendous punch prior to maturing into full-sized adults, as new research describes.

Unlike their lumbering yet undeniably powerful parents, teenage T. rex were fast and agile, equipped with teeth that were goodfor cutting, not crushing. These juveniles were able to hold their own in a perilous Cretaceous world, before entering into a growth spurt that brought them into adulthood and a new way of life.

Such are the findings of new research published in Scientific Reports, in which paleontologists analyzed a pair of mid-sized T. rex skeletons found during the early 2000s. Known as Jane and Petey, these fossils were unearthed in Carter County, Montana by paleontologists from the Burpee Museum of Natural History in Rockford, Illinois.

Jane and Petey were roughly half the size of an adultT. rex, which could grow to 12 meters (40 feet) in length. Fully mature T. rexwith their 1.5-meter-long (5-foot) headswere basically gigantic chomping machines who used their powerful jaws to crush prey. Needless to say, this impressive bone-snapping ability, at an estimated 8,000 pounds of force, didnt appear until later in life. The new research is important because it shows how juvenile T. rexes survived before they developed this capacity.

Importantly, the new research could also settle a debate caused by the discovery of Jane, Petey, and other apparently mid-sized T. rex skeletons. Some paleontologists argued that these fossils didnt belong to T. rex, but rather a pygmy genus of tyrannosaurid, which they dubbed Nanotyrannus. The evidence presented in the new paper, led by Holly Woodward from the Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology at the Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, likely represents the death knell for the Nanotyrannus theory, which, to be fair, is a fringe theory to begin with.

The reason for this uncertainty and the ongoing debate, however, can be traced to the lack of juvenile dinosaur specimens.

Historically, many museums would collect the biggest, most impressive fossils of a dinosaur species for display and ignore the others, said Woodward in a press release. The problem is that those smaller fossils may be from younger animals. So, for a long while weve had large gaps in our understanding of how dinosaurs grew up, and T. rex is no exception.

Using a technique known as paleohistology, Woodward and her colleagues studied the microscopic structures embedded within the fossilized bones. Analysis of thin slices taken from the femur and tibia conveyed the specimens age, growth rate, and level of maturity.

To me, its always amazing to find that if you have something like a huge fossilized dinosaur bone, its fossilized on the microscopic level as well, said Woodward. And by comparing these fossilized microstructures to similar features found in modern bone, we know they provide clues to metabolism, growth rate, and age.

Results of the analysis showed that Jane and Petey were around 13 to 15 years old when they died, which means they had yet to experience their pre-adult growth spurt; T. rexes reached maturity at around 20 years of age, but they didnt live much beyond 30.

The new research also showed that T. rex exhibited rapid growth rates similar to modern birds and mammals, but their rate of growth was regulated by the availability of food. Variability in their growth, as evidenced by spacings the growth rings of their bones, suggests they grew quickly when food was in abundance and slowly when food was scarce.

This study helps us understand how T. rex went from a tiny baby to enormous adult, Steven Brusatte, a University of Edinburgh paleontologist not involved with the study, told Gizmodo in an email. Not only did they grow super fast, but they could change their growth rates depending on how much food and resources were available. This flexibility helped T. rex so utterly dominate its ecosystem.

And finally, the new research also shows that these pint-sized T. rexes were still a force to be reckoned with. They were sleek, slender, and fleet-footed and had wonderful knife-like teeth, said study co-author Scott Williams from the Museum of the Rockies in a press release. The new research suggests these animals probably dominated their ecosystems at all ages, he said.

Standing a bit taller than a large horse and measuring around 20 feet in length, teenage T. rexes mustve terrorized the Cretaceous landscape. It seems fitting that this iconic dinosaur, even before reaching full maturity, was already plenty deadly.

See original here:
Smaller but Still Deadly: New Insights Into the Life of Teenage T. Rex - Gizmodo

Science in the 2010s: Neuroscience – Labmate Online

Over the past decade the pace of neuroscience innovation has continued to accelerate, with scientists harnessing advanced technologies and collaborative Open Science frameworksto pioneer new breakthroughs. Want to look back on the past 10 years? Here are some of the most significant neuroscience discoveries of the 2010s.

2010 saw Argentinian neuroscientist and professor Fernando Nottebohm honoured with the Benjamin Franklin Medal in Life Sciences for proving that neurogenesis does occur in the adult vertebrate brain. The discovery was a serious breakthrough for neuroscience, with member sof the Benjamin Franklin Medal committee praising Nottebohm for "generating a completely new approach to the quest for cures for brain injury and degenerative disease."

In 2012 American scientist Van Wedeen pioneered an award-winning study that revealed the intricate wiring patterns of the human brain. It was one of the first studies to portray the organ as a complex yet systematic grid, as opposed to a disorderly tangle.

In 2014 the FIFA World Cup made more than just sports headlines when Brazilian physician Miguel Nicolelis developed a robotic suit that allowed a quadriplegic teen to kick-off the opening game of the tournament. Nicolelis was later inaugurated as a member of the prestigious Pontifical Academy of Sciences.

Researchers from the University of Manchester kicked off 2016 with a major finding that linked the development of Alzheimers disease to a specific type of virus, as well as two strains of bacteria. The study helped support evidence that the neurodegenerative disease is partly caused by a dormant microbial component, possible triggered by iron dysregulation.

2018 marked a major milestone for neurotechnology, with an open-access studypublished inPLOS One introducing a brain implant system that allows patients paralysed by neurodegenerative disorders to send emails, communicate with others and shop online using brain waves connected to an off-the-shelf Android tablet.

Just weeks before the end of 2019, scientists at the University of North Carolina Health Care discovered a key neural circuit that actively regulates alcohol consumption in animals. The findings were published in the Journal of Neuroscience and offered new insight into the role brain cells play in influencing reward-induced behaviours such as alcohol consumption.

Want to know more about the latest neuroscience breakthroughs? Backed by five years of research, Dementias Platform UK is working to transform the dementia research landscape and accelerate the development of diagnosis and treatments, with some of the most significant advances explored in 'Changing Dementia Horizons: DPUK Progress Outlined.

View original post here:
Science in the 2010s: Neuroscience - Labmate Online

Bruce McEwen, Pioneer in Study of Stress’s Impact on the Brain, Dies at 81 – Scientific American

A leading figure in the field of neuroscience, BruceMcEwen, died on January 2 after a brief illness.

Beginning in the1960s,McEwenexploredhow stress hormonescould alter the way genes are expressed in the brain, having a consequent impact on memory,mood and decision-making. This work contradicted the accepted academic dogma of the time that the brain does not change during adulthood.

One noted example of the Rockefeller University professors work was the finding that chronic stress could lead to loss of neurons in the brain'shippocampalarea, a locus for memory formation.

McEwen, 81, head of RockefellersHarold and MargaretMillikenHatch Laboratory ofNeuroendocrinology, worked with hiswife KarenBulloch, also a Rockefellerprofessor, to examine brain immune cellsin inflammation andneurodegenerativedisease.

In 1976, he wrote an article forScientific Americanentitled "Interactions between Hormones and Nerve Tissue" in which he observed in the formal language of the day:

During his career, he coined the term allostaticload to convey how lingering stress affectsbody and brainand much of his recent research was devotedto the impact on the brain of nutrition, physical activity, early-life trauma and other factors.

One of McEwens well-known former graduate students, RobertSapolsky, remarked in aprepared statement from Rockefeller:Hiswork became increasingly more expansive and integrativein later years he called himself a molecular sociologist. He made the most seminal findings regarding how steroid hormones affect the brain. Sapolsky is aprofessor of biological sciences at Stanford University.

McEwen'sresearchhas been cited more than 130,000 times in the scientific literature, and he was co-author ofThe End of Stress as We Know It (Joseph Henry Press, 2002).

Read the original:
Bruce McEwen, Pioneer in Study of Stress's Impact on the Brain, Dies at 81 - Scientific American

Academic paper in comic form explores ethics of treating torturer with PTSD – Ars Technica

Enlarge / Martinique-born psychiatrist Franz Fanon explored the bioethics of studying and treating trauma in his 1961 book, The Wretched of the Earth. An academic paper written in comic form examines one case study in particular from a modern perspective.

tupungato/Getty Images

Is it possible to ethically treat someone with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) developed as a result of inflicting torture on others? That's the question posed in a paper published last summer in AJOB Neuroscience, but there's a twist. The paper is written and illustrated as a comic book by Lehigh University artist and neuroscientist Ann E. Fink.

Fink is part of a growing movement called "graphic medicine," a term coined back in 2007 by physician and comics artist Ian Williams to describe the use of comics to enhance both professional and general public discourse on healthcare issues. Comics may be a form of visual rhetoric ideal for medical education and patient care, and proponents include M.K. Czerwiec, aka "Comic Nurse," who worked in an HIV hospice at the height of the AIDS epidemic. When the clinic closed in 2000, she struggled to find an outlet to express the bittersweet emotions she was feeling, but she found the comic format was perfect.

"I realized that the combination of image and text in sequential fashion really helped me organize my thoughts," Czerwiec told the University of Chicago News last year. "It just worked." Now an artist in residence at Northwestern University's Feinberg School of Medicine, she published a graphic nonfiction memoir/oral history, Taking Turns: Stories from HIV/AIDS Care Unit 371, in 2017. Czerwiec and Williams, along with Penn State University's Michael Green, were among the first attendees in 2010 of what is now an annual international graphic medicine conference. They published The Graphic Medicine Manifesto, a collection of scholarly essays with visual narratives, in 2015.

Like many in the graphic medicine community, Fink has a longstanding interest in comics, although her early training was in psychology and neuroscience, with an emphasis on the larger social and ethical questions surrounding learning, memory, and mental health. During a fellowship at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, she met comic art legend Lynda Barry and a group called the Applied Comics Kitchen. That's when Fink started using comics to teach topics in biology and health. "A lot of this is really about centering the personal narrative, the experience of the patient, the experience of the provider," she told Ars. But the AJOB Neuroscience paper is her first academic essay in comic form.

In the paper, Fink revisits in comic form a bioethical dilemma described by psychiatrist and political philosopher Franz Fanon in his seminal 1961 book, The Wretched of the Earth. Born on the Caribbean island of Martinique (then a French colony) and educated in France, Fanon described the dehumanizing effects of colonialism on the colonized people in his book, offering numerous case studies he'd encountered in the final chapter.

The most well-known is the tale of a white male police inspector in Algeria whose job involved torturing prisoners of the colonial government for many hours each day. He would likely have been diagnosed with PTSD today, since the stress of his day job led to the man regularly beating his wife and children at homeincluding a 20-month-old infant. He sought treatment, Fanon wrote, to deal with the stress and guilt he felt over torturing human beings so that he could continue torturing people at work with "total peace of mind"and thereby curb the impulse to inflict physical abuse on his own family.

The police inspector's bioethics dilemma and decision tree

Ann E. Fink

Should he help this man suffering from PTSD be a better torturer?

Ann E. Fink

Outlining the basics of PTSD

Ann E. Fink

Useful lessons for the torturers of today?

Ann E. Fink

On a lighter note: a dissertation on Icelandic sagas in comic form

Yoav Tirosh

This posed an ethical dilemma for Fanon. The police inspector is both victim and perpetrator: he inflicts abuse on Algerian prisoners and his family, but he himself is also a pawn and a victim of the larger sociopolitical pressures and mental trauma incurred on the job. So should Fanon treat the man and make him a better torturer, thereby sparing his wife and children while Algerian citizens continue to suffer? Or, should he refuse to treat him and let the family continue to suffer? And was it even possible to treat the man in any meaningful sense, if he continued to work in the context of an inherently violent colonial regime?

Fink's interest in learning and memoryparticularly her early experiments on the plasticity of individual neurons in the amygdala region of the brainled to an interest in PTSD. "I always wanted to put it in a broader context," she said. When she read Fanon's police inspector case study in The Wretched of the Earth, the psychiatrist's ethical dilemma struck a chord. "How do you think about PTSD as a reducible biological phenomenon in the context of a society that's sick, violent, and inhumane?" she said.

"How do you think about PTSD as a reducible biological phenomenon in the context of a society that's sick, violent, andinhumane?"

For Fink, the case is a useful starting point to explore the larger ethical issues surrounding the social dimensions of traumatic stress. She developed a "decision tree" to help clarify the complex ethical issues involved. "You can think of PTSD as a biological entity, or something socially contextualized," said Fink. "And you can think of it as a personal narrative issue."

But there are no easy solutions to the dilemma. "I don't have an answer, and that is kind of the point," Fink told Ars. "It wouldn't be a good ethical dilemma if it had a pat answer. The narrative shows us what the problems are." Fanon's own solution wasn't a solution at all. He quit his job at the hospital and joined the Algerian resistance. "This situation wasn't tenable for him in the long run," she said. "HIs ultimate conclusion is that you can't treat PTSD. There's no healing you can do in this inhuman context."

The comic trend might be spreading beyond the health and medicine arena. Last fall, a PhD candidate at the University of Iceland produced a comic version of the abstractfor his doctoral dissertation on a famous 13th century Icelandic saga. TheLjsvetninga saga has multiple versions, and scholarship has typically focused on dating the various versions to determine which might be the earliest. But Yoav Tirosh chose to explore how the saga's construction has constantly changed. His comic abstract is in the form of a dialogue, in which a fictional version of Tirosh meets the ghost of one of the saga's central figures (Gumundr inn rki, a goi, aka a priest or chieftain) in the restroom of a hotel inReykjavk.

I liked the challenge of trying to interpret visually something that is very text-based like a PhD thesis, and initially even intended it to be incorporated into the thesis itself, he told Medievalists.net. This, however, would have delayed my submission in at least a month and time was pressing, so I decided to do it during my post-submission 'vacation.'" It also served as preparation for a bigger goal: Tirosh hopes to produce an introduction to Old Norse literature in comic form one day.

DOI: AJOB Neuroscience, 2019. 10.1080/21507740.2019.1632970 (About DOIs).

Read more:
Academic paper in comic form explores ethics of treating torturer with PTSD - Ars Technica

Integrating Academic Inquiry and Reformist Activism in Psychiatry – Psychiatric Times

CONVERSATIONS IN CRITICAL PSYCHIATRY

Conversations in Critical Psychiatry is an interview series aimed to engage prominent critics within and outside the profession who have made meaningful criticisms of psychiatry and have offered constructive alternative perspectives to the current status quo.

Sandra Steingard, MD, is Chief Medical Officer, Howard Center, Burlington, Vermont and Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine. She is chair of the board of the Foundation for Excellence in Mental Health Care, a member of the board of the American Association of Community Psychiatrists, and on the advisory board of Mad in America Continuing Education. She is editor of the book, Critical Psychiatry: Controversies and Clinical Implications, published by Springer in 2019. Beginning January 2020, she has also assumed the role of Editor-in-Chief of the Community Mental Health Journal.

G. Scott Waterman, MD, is Professor of Psychiatry Emeritus at the University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, where he served at various times as Director of Psychopharmacology, Director of Medical Student Education in Psychiatry, and Associate Dean for Student Affairs. Upon his retirement, Dr Waterman enrolled in the graduate program of the Department of History at the University of Vermont, where he studied extremist social and political movements of modern Europe and America and received his MA a few years ago. He is a member of the executive council of the Association for the Advancement of Philosophy and Psychiatry and teaches courses in philosophy of psychiatry at the University of Vermont.

Dr Steingard and Dr Waterman have been married for 33 years.

I got to know Dr Waterman through the Association for the Advancement of Philosophy and Psychiatryan organization I would recommend to all readersand I have been impressed with his intellectual rigor in the course of our interactions. He began his career with research interests in the neurobiological foundations of childhood-onset mental illness but eventually shifted his academic focus to philosophy of psychiatry. I became more acquainted with Dr Steingard's ideas after I read Critical Psychiatry: Controversies and Clinical Implications, published earlier last year. The volume presents an overview of the critical psychiatry movement with impressive clarity and is highly accessible to clinicians and trainees. The happy coincidence that these two intelligent and accomplished psychiatrists are married allowed me to engage them in this joint interview where their complementary views, side by side, make the whole greater than the sum of its parts.

Aftab: Dr Steingard, can you tell us briefly about how you got involved with the critical psychiatry movement and how this involvement has changed how you practice as a psychiatrist? Also, since a disappointingly large number of people think of the critical psychiatry movement as being synonymous with the antipsychiatry movement, can you shed some light on why that is not the case?

Steingard: There is not an absolute delineation between critical psychiatry and antipsychiatry. Bonnie Burstow of the University of Toronto characterizes antipsychiatry as an abolitionist movement whose proponents consider psychiatry so fundamentally flawed as to be beyond reform. Critical psychiatry, on the other hand, includes both critical academic inquiry and reformist activism. It encompasses critiques that range from questioning the validity of our diagnostic system and investigating the effects of conflicts of interest on clinical practice to examining the impact of structural societal forcespoverty, sexism, racism, for exampleon mental well-being and the manifestations of psychiatric disorders. Critical psychiatry also acknowledges the important contributions of those with lived experience of receiving psychiatric treatment or being labeled with psychiatric conditions not only to evaluating clinical care but also designing and conducting research. Those are some of the areas that have had great salience for me.

The evolution of my critical stance toward psychiatry began early. I entered the field because I was fascinated by psychoanalysis. When I was introduced, as a psychiatry resident, to various critiques of psychoanalytic theory such as Adolf Grnbaums work, I was disappointed at my teachers inability to address them. That contributed to my decision to leave psychoanalytic training and shift my focus to studying and caring for people who experience psychosis. Many new drugs came on the market in the 1990s. I was initially hopeful that they would improve care but was demoralized to witness the blatant hype that was carried out, not only by the pharmaceutical industry but also by academic leaders. Initially, I was comfortable thinking about psychosis as reflective of brain diseaseor at least a disruption of brain functionsbut in more recent years, as I have been introduced to the perspectives of the critical social sciences, as well as to people who have been treated for a variety of psychiatric disorders, I have broadened my perspective on the conceptualization of psychosis (and all psychiatric phenomena).

It is difficult to summarize how this has changed my practice, but I have been influenced by Joanna Moncrieffs drug-centered approach to pharmacotherapy and need-adapted treatments. These ideas have helped me to embody principles that are not inherently controversial but, nevertheless, hard to implement. They include adopting a patient-centered focus, practicing with humility and transparency, and acknowledging that our medical perspective may not be the only (or best) way to conceptualize the nature of our patients distress.

Aftab: Dr Waterman, do you also identify with the critical psychiatry movement? How would you describe your identity as a psychiatrist?

Waterman: I would like to think that, throughout my career, I was a critical psychiatrist in the generic sense of challenging prevailing conceptualizations and practices. And while I have in recent years been largely an observer from the periphery of what has come to be called the critical psychiatry movement, I share a number of its formulations and priorities. Thus, my former preoccupations with matters like mind-body dualistic fallacies in medical discourse and training, the conceptual problems of the biopsychosocial model, and the multiple shortcomings of the DSM diagnostic system have moved aside to make room for concerns about personal autonomy, coercion, epistemic justice, and the commercial corruption of the empiric database of medicine. Although I continue to be deeply involved in philosophy of psychiatry, my identity as a psychiatrist is as a retired oneif, indeed, I remain one at all.

Aftab: Dr Steingard, you and Dr Moncrief write: We live in the era of evidenced-based practice. If an approach is not funded, then it will never acquire the kind of data that would allow it to be considered evidence-based. This creates a closed loop: only research that is hypothesized to be of value is funded; understudied approaches that might be of value are ignored because they are not considered evidenced-based.1

That's a very important point. A lot of people dont appreciate the institutional and political forces which determine what gets funded and what gets studied. It certainly suggests that looking only at evidenced-based literature can be a recipe for confirmation bias. How should we approach this situation?

Steingard: There is no good answer, but it begins with a recognition of the problem. In addition, it is important for psychiatrists to understand what questions randomized controlled studies do and do not answer. For instance, they can detect differences that are not necessarily clinically meaningful. Often, the emphasis is put on the statistical rather than clinical significance of findings and then an echo chamber of public relations promotes a narrative in the absence of more critical examination of the data. On the other hand, I appreciate that it is extremely time consuming to parse out all of the available data on each topic that might be of interest to a busy clinician. One has to decide at some point to trust expert sources. I wish we could have more confidence in the academic establishment.

Aftab: Dr Waterman, one of the reasons you were drawn to psychiatry was the promise that a neuroscientific understanding of psychiatric conditions is on the horizon and it will transform the way we practice psychiatry. What do you think explains the failure of neuroscience so far to have the revolutionary impact on clinical psychiatry that was expected? Do you have conceptual reasons to think that such a revolution may never happen?

Waterman: When we were residents, Sandy and I attended a lecture by the renowned philosopher of mind and of neuroscience, Patricia Churchland (whose argumentsalong with those of her husband, Paul Churchlandfor a particular brand of materialism exerted great influence on me). She recounted an anecdote involving their son, who I believe was about six years old at the time. He reportedly asked of his philosopher-parents at breakfast one morning, What if the brain is more complicated than it is smart? While doubtless not the first person to pose that question, it seems unlikely to be one that has occurred to many first-graders!

The profound complexities of the brain are only half of the equation. The expectation that advances in neuroscience would revolutionize clinical psychiatry seems to me to be predicated on anticipation of sufficient understandings of two (at least currently) disparate arenas: the brain being one and the other being the psychiatric phenomena whose neuroscientific foundations are being sought but which manifest at the level of the whole person. Those phenomena entail both subjective/first-person (emotions, cognitions) and objective/third-person (behaviors) components that are themselves both complex and heterogenous from person to person. The complexities they present include things like the looping effects of which Ian Hacking writes,2 whose material instantiation in the brain might be intractable. So what comprehension of psychiatric phenomenahow best to capture, define, describe, and classify themwill allow us to match up such understandings with our growing grasp of neuroscience? Moreover, what levels of neuroscientific understandinggenes?, gene products?, neurons?, neural circuits?, regional or whole-brain physiology?, combinations of them?should we expect to match up with our still-elusive grasp of psychiatric phenomena? I remain enough of a materialist to believe that advances in neuroscience might well translate into significant advances in clinical psychiatry, but enough of an empiricist to recognize that a revolution is not in the offing and that explanatory pluralism (and its clinical extensions) are our best bet for the foreseeable future.

Aftab: Dr Steingard, can you elaborate for the readers your approach to psychopharmacology that you have espoused in Critical Psychiatry?

Steingard: This approach has been characterized by Joanna Moncrieff as a drug-centered approach to psychopharmacotherapy. It considers the drugs we use as psychoactive substances that alter brain function in ways that may be experienced as beneficial. This is distinct from a disease-centered approach which posits that the drugs work by fixing something that is not working correctly. There has been much discussion in our field (including in articles in Psychiatric Times) about whether or not psychiatry as a field promoted the so-called chemical imbalance theory. I would argue that most people have come to believe that the drugs we prescribe work by correcting problems thought to underlie psychiatric conditions. Thus, for example, SSRIs are said to fix a problem in the serotonin system and antipsychotic drugs fix a problem in the dopamine system. However, what we have learned is that while the drugs clinical effects might be related to the way they alter these systems, evidence is lacking that depression results from low levels of serotonin and psychosis reflects high levels of dopamine. Nevertheless, these beliefs persist and influence the way physicians talk to patients about these drugs.

Aftab: You write The challenge is that psychiatrists are currently charged with being the gatekeepers to psychoactive drug use . . . Rather than putting psychiatrists in the role of determining who can and cannot have legitimate access to such drugs, psychiatrists can be the experts on drug action.3 How does the drug-centered approach change the gatekeeper role of psychiatrists, since whether you adopt a drug-centered approach or disease-centered approach, psychiatrists still have the prescribing power and therefore they still have the responsibility to determine legitimate access?

Steingard: As long as psychiatrists (and others) hold prescribing privileges, there is no way for us to avoid acting as gatekeepers to drug access. However, what I prefer about the drug-centered approach is that it avoids what I think is a false distinction between good and bad drugs or between good and bad uses of drugs. The disease-centered approach fosters the notions that good drugs are those that are used to treat diseases or disorders while bad drugs are those that people use recreationally. Such thinking leads to the tortured distinction we see in discussions of cannabis between so-called medical and recreational marijuana. From a drug-centered perspective, our role would be to educate not only our patients but our communities about what these drugs do, what problems they can cause, and the challenges of discontinuation, among other things. We would help people make judicious decisions about their health. People have sought out psychoactive substances for a very long time and this is not likely to abate. If we push aside the moral judgements and the sometimes-arbitrary distinctions between medical and other uses, we would have a more honest and transparent discussion about what these drugs do and do not do.

Continued >

References:

1. Moncrieff J, Steingard S. What is Critical Psychiatry? In: Critical Psychiatry: Controversies and Clinical Implications. Steingard S (Ed). Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2019.

2. Hacking I. The Looping Effect of Human Kinds. In: Sperber D, Premack D, and Premack AJ, eds. Causal Cognition: A Multidisciplinary Debate. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1995.

3. Steingard S. A Path to the Future for Psychiatry? In: Critical Psychiatry: Controversies and Clinical Implications. Steingard S, Ed. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2019.

4. Waterman GS, Batra J. Biopsychosocial psychiatry. Am J Psychiatry. 2003;160:185.

5. Waterman GS. Why I am not a psychiatrist and Responses to commentaries. Bulletin of the Association for the Advancement of Philosophy and Psychiatry. 2019;26:2-3,9-12. https://philosophyandpsychiatry.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/aapp-bulletin-vol-26-1-2019-.pdf. Accessed January 3, 2019.

6. Waterman GS. Does the biopsychosocial model help or hinder our efforts to understand and teach psychiatry? Psychiatric Times. 2006;23(14):12-13.

See more here:
Integrating Academic Inquiry and Reformist Activism in Psychiatry - Psychiatric Times