December 23, 2012

Genetically Altering Unborn Babies Personalities A Moral Obligation says Oxford Professor

Genetically screening our offspring to make them better people is just “responsible parenting”, claims an eminent Oxford academic, The Telegraph reports.

Professor Julian Savulescu, editor-in-chief of the Journal of Medical Ethics said that creating so-called designer babies could be considered a “moral obligation” as it makes them grow up into “ethically better children”, this based on a few genetic links to ‘personality disorders’.

He said that we should actively give parents the choice to screen out personality flaws in their children as it meant they were then less likely to “harm themselves and others”.

Studies show that the child’s upbringing, including parenthood and
schooling methods are the root causes of many ‘personality flaws’. Other studies give strong evidence that nutrition, meditation and exercise greatly influence behavioural patterns and emotional well-being. This entire theory is also blind to the side effects of many medicines, vaccines, food additives and (some) GMO foods that have been proven to affect psychological behaviour, and this isn’t even touching on the possible beneficial use of marijuana and other substances for those with undesired personality traits.

“Surely trying to ensure that your children have the best, or a good enough, opportunity for a great life is responsible parenting?” wrote Prof Savulescu, the Uehiro Professor in practical ethics. Clearly without thinking of the potentially worse side effects of this theoretical treatment.

Professor Savulescu goes on to say that science is increasingly discovering that genes have a significant influence on personality — with certain genetic markers in embryo suggesting future characteristics.

In the end, he said, “rational design” would help lead to a better, more intelligent and less violent society in the future. Definitely something westernised nations will be pushing for - obedience.

Indeed, when it comes to screening out personality flaws, such as potential alcoholism, psychopathy and disposition to violence, you could argue that people have a moral obligation to select ethically better children. They are, after all, less likely to harm themselves and others.

He said that “we already routinely screen embryos and foetuses for conditions such as cystic fibrosis and Down’s syndrome and couples can test embryos for inherited bowel and breast cancer genes. Rational design is just a natural extension of this”. ”Natural extension” he said.

He said that unlike the eugenics movements, which fell out of favour when it was adopted by the Nazis, the system would be voluntary and allow parents to choose the characteristics of their children.

Many human genes have also been patented which raises huge ethical questions, as explained by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU):

A 2005 study found that 4,382 of the 23,688 human genes in the National Center for Biotechnology Information’s gene database are explicitly claimed as intellectual property. This means that nearly 20% of human genes are patented.

Prof Savulescu:

Whether we like it or not, the future of humanity is in our hands now. Rather than fearing genetics, we should embrace it. We can do better than chance.

This type of genetic modification, called cytoplasmic transfer already results in a slightly higher chance of death and some have already been diagnosed with autism.

It seems that while we do not have freedom to smoke a plant or to gain access to effective cancer treating drugs such as DCA due to insufficient testing, the modification of the human species is taken lightly. Who knows what purposeful and accidental modifications will come from this.

Sources:

Genetically engineering ‘ethical’ babies is a moral obligation, says Oxford professor - https://www.kurzweilai.net/genetically-engineering-ethical-babies-is-a-moral-obligation-says-oxford-professor

Genetically engineering ‘ethical’ babies is a moral obligation, says Oxford professor - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9480372/Genetically-engineering-ethical-babies-is-a-moral-obligation-says-Oxford-professor.html

DNA From Three Parents Okay, Genetically Modified Babies Are Ethical Says British Council - https://www.pakalertpress.com/2012/07/07/dna-from-three-parents-okay-genetically-modified-babies-are-ethical-says-british-council

Mitochondrial DNA disorders Introduction - https://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/mitochondrial-dna-disorders/mitochondrial-dna-disorders-introduction

Julian Savulescu - https://www.neuroethics.ox.ac.uk/our_members/julian_savulescu

Preventing mitochondrial disease - an explanation - Newcastle University - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Za6pTxcFdvg

Fertility breakthrough for inherited mitochondrial disease (HD) | A film by the Wellcome Trust - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wFn9Oj4u2E

9 Ways Exercise Can Make You Feel Better - https://www.fitwatch.com/weight-loss/9-ways-exercise-can-make-you-feel-better-605.html

Exercise and Stress Relief - https://exercise.about.com/od/healthinjuries/a/stressrelief.htm

Exercise: 7 benefits of regular physical activity - https://www.mayoclinic.com/health/exercise/HQ01676

Depression and anxiety: Exercise eases symptoms - https://www.mayoclinic.com/health/depression-and-exercise/MH00043

Personality Development - https://www.indiaparenting.net/person-develop.asp

Effects of parent personality, upbringing, and marijuana use on the parent-child attachment relationship. - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10673836

Nutritional Influences on Aggressive Behavior - https://orthomolecular.org/library/articles/webach.shtml

Dr Russell Blaylock Nutrition and Behavior Aspartame MSG - https://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2963728494205235281

Dr. Russell Blaylock: Fluoride’s Deadly Secret - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ie6gJHqkSgc

The Links Between Diet and Behaviour - https://www.foodforthebrain.org/content.asp?id_Content=1767

The Links Between Diet and Behaviour. (PDF) - https://www.foodforthebrain.org/download.asp?id_Doc=96

Vaccines Will Soon Be Used to Control Behavior - https://www.gaia-health.com/articles451/000478-vaccines-behavior.shtml

Leaked Pentagon Video - Flu Vaccine Use to Modify Human Behavior - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MuXgpl2Sxg

Vaccination and Social Violence - https://www.whale.to/vaccines/coulter5.html

Vaccination and Violent Crime - https://www.whale.to/vaccines/coulter6.html

THE BRAINS OF THE INOCULATED - https://www.whale.to/vaccines/loat1.html

BEHAVIOURAL FACTORS IN IMMUNIZATION (PDF) - https://www.who.int/mental_health/media/en/28.pdf

GM Foods are Harming our Kids - https://healthandwealthcentre.com/gm-foods-are-harming-our-kids.html

Removing junk food (and GMOs) improved children’s behavior - https://www.naturalhealth365.com/food/junk-food-and-gmo.html

World’s first genetically modified babies born - https://weirdworldnews.org/2012/07/13/worlds-first-genetically-modified-babies-born/

Dozens of Genetically Modified Babies Already Born - How Will They Alter Human Species? - https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/07/17/first-genetically-modified-babies-born.aspx

Meditation improves emotional behaviour - https://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-04-13/fitness/31254064_1_meditation-practices-behaviour

DCA - Cancer Cure Discovered - But YOU can’t have it…. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LXH-TJYS5w

Giant Mega Corporation, URS Corporation, Runs Monsanto’s World HQ, Trains Troops

Special Thanks to the team at Exposing The Truth for compiling information

Monsanto’s World HQ in St. Louis, Missouri - from urscorp.com

I did a search for Monsanto’s World HQ and came upon this page.

“URS provides complete facilities management services in support of Monsanto’s world headquarters.” They (URS Corporation) have a network of offices in nearly 50 countries and provide national, state and local government services to a myriad of countries, as well as private sector services worldwide.

Who is URS Corporation?

They build weapons and train troops. “URS manages and operates government installations, military bases and laboratories.”

They help run Kennedy Space Center, where NASA is based, and work with Kennedy to “develop and execute the ‘Master Plan.’” Recently a new master plan was developed in which it was decided that NASA will sell in to the private sector.

According to Trey Carlson, Master Planner for Kennedy Space Center, one of the themes of the new “Future Development Concept” is “to adopt new business practices allowing companies and outside organizations to make investments in the center to operate their enterprises.”

“It is very challenging making the transition from a government program focused primarily on a single crewed spacecraft to a multiuser program.”

An artist rendering of the new headquarters building for NASA’s Kennedy Space Center. - nasa.gov

According to URS Corporation, they “provide vital services for every facet of daily operations at the Kennedy Space Center.”

As one of the goals of the new plan is “to build new facilities that are economically and environmentally sustainable,” it would stand to reason that URS Corporation are involved in that facet.

They are “one of the largest contractors serving the food, beverage and consumer products industries and have engineered and constructed more pulp and paper mill facilities than any other contractor.” They constructed the Hoover Dam in the 1930′s.

“Through a joint venture with Alberici Constructors, URS is building one of the world’s largest cement plants for Holcim (US) Inc.”

They “are one of the few companies globally that offer wholly integrated services spanning the full project life cycle for the mining industry” and “are the only North American contractor—and one of only four globally—to offer operations and maintenance services.”

They “have engineered more than 250,000 megawatts of electricity worldwide—more than any other contractor and equivalent to almost one-fourth of the current generating capacity in the United States. ”

“URS has provided planning, engineering or construction services for virtually every nuclear power plant operating in the United States today”

In regards to fossil fuels, they have “experience in dealing with all major suppliers in this industry.”

On oil, they “are a leading provider of design, construction and production services across the upstream, midstream and downstream supply chain” (That’s drilling, pipe-lining and refining). Since purchasing Flint Energy Services (now URS Flint) for $1.25 billion in February of 2012, they now service ” every major active North American oil and gas basin.”

They have ” longstanding relationships with the world’s leading petrochemical and specialty chemical companies.”

They “operate approximately 300 miles of toll roads in the United States” and “have design and construction experience on every type of highway, bridge, tunnel and interchange.”

They were responsible for the “Hudson-Bergen Light Rail Transit project—the first design-build-operate-maintain transit project in the United States” in which they “are now providing operations and maintenance under a 20-year contract.” Upon further exploration, I noticed the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail is actually operated by 21st Century Rail Corporation. Then I noticed that the $1.9 billion 20 year contract was actually awarded to 21st Century Rail Corporation. THEN I noticed that 21st Century Rail Corporation is a “team led by URS.” So if URS Corporation has the 20 year contract, but 21st Century Rail Corporation has the contract, wouldn’t it mean URS Corporation is 21st Century Rail Corporation? How many other corporations are also URS Corporation?

It is more involved than that, though. URS Corporation “supoprts a wide range of complex, multiyear programs at U.S. Department of Defense and other government facilities throughout the world,” among which include “the renovation of the National Archives Building in Washington, D.C. and the prototype design for all future U.S. embassies.”

“Since 1986, URS has trained over 20,000 student pilots at the U.S. Army Aviation Center for Excellence at Fort Rucker, Alabama.” URS Corporation “also is a leader in creating curricula for a new aviation community–Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) operators.” “Since 1990, [they] have worked with the U.S. Navy to develop flexible education programs for every level of officer operating VIRGINIA class submarines.”

The Pentagon, Headquarters of the US Department of Defense - photo by David B. Gleason

The first paragraph of their “Operations & Maintenance” page states clearly, “URS provides operations and maintenance services to weapons systems worldwide for the United States government. These services are performed for all branches of the Department of Defense, as well as the U.S. Coast Guard. URS’ services support every type of vehicle—in the air, on the ground and at sea. This includes manned and unmanned, rotary- and fixed- wing, wheeled and tracked, and above- and under-sea vessels.”

They have “longstanding relationships with the world’s leading chemical and pharmaceutical companies” and offer “innovative support services during all stages of the development and operations cycle.”

I feel like I’m talked out, and all I’ve really done is quote their website. They also offer “a full range of planning, design, construction and program and construction management services across the water and wastewater industry, including water supply planning, water storage and transmission, water quality management planning, water treatment and distribution, and wastewater collection, treatment and disposal.”

It would be difficult to display the vast array of projects taken on and listed by URS Corporation here, so I urge you to visit their project page and peruse yourself. I also urge you to visit their home page to get a glimpse at some of the categories of things they handle.

URS Corporation’s Headquarters is located at:

600 Montgomery Street, 26th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-2728 USA
+1.415.774.2700 +1.415.398.1905 fax

Sources:

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/news/kscmasterplanrevision.html

https://ursflint.acquisitioninformation.com

https://www.urscorp.com

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_class_submarine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hudson%E2%80%93Bergen_Light_Rail

New nanoparticles shrink tumors in mice

Nanoparticles that shut off cancer genes could also allow researchers to screen potential drug targets more rapidly

MIT researchers have developed RNA-delivering nanoparticles that

Short strands of RNA can be used to selectively turn off cancer genes (credit: MIT)

allow for rapid screening of new drug targets in mice.

By sequencing cancer-cell genomes, scientists have discovered vast numbers of genes that are mutated, deleted or copied in cancer cells. This treasure trove is a boon for researchers seeking new drug targets, but it is nearly impossible to test them all in a timely fashion.

In their first mouse study, done with researchers at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and the Broad Institute, they showed that nanoparticles that target a protein known as ID4 can shrink ovarian tumors.

The nanoparticle system could relieve a significant bottleneck in cancer-drug development, says Sangeeta Bhatia, the John and Dorothy Wilson Professor of Health Sciences and Technology and Electrical Engineering and Computer Science and a member of the David H. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research at MIT.

“What we did was try to set forth a pipeline where you start with all of the targets that are pouring out of genomics, and you sequentially filter them through a mouse model to figure out which ones are important. By doing that, you can prioritize the ones you want to target clinically using RNA interference, or develop drugs against,” says Bhatia, one of the paper’s senior authors.

William Hahn, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and the paper’s other senior author, is the leader of Project Achilles, a collaborative effort to identify promising new targets for cancer drugs from the flood of data coming from the National Cancer Institute’s cancer-genome-sequencing project.

Among those potential targets are many considered to be “undruggable,” meaning that the proteins don’t have any pockets where a traditional drug could bind to them. The new nanoparticles, which deliver short strands of RNA that can shut off a particular gene, may help scientists go after those undruggable proteins.

“If we could figure out how to make this work [in humans], it would open up a whole new class of targets that hadn’t been available,” says Hahn, who is also director of the Center for Cancer Genome Discovery at Dana-Farber and a senior associate member of the Broad Institute.

An abundance of targets

Through Project Achilles, Hahn and his colleagues have been testing the functions of many of the genes disrupted in ovarian cancer cells. By revealing genes critical to cancer-cell survival, this approach has narrowed the list of potential targets to several dozen.

Typically, the next step in identifying a good drug target would be to genetically engineer a strain of mice that are missing (or overexpressing) the gene in question, to see how they respond when tumors develop. However, this normally takes two to four years. A much faster way to study these genes would be simply to turn them off after a tumor appears.

RNA interference (RNAi) offers a promising way to do that. During this naturally occurring phenomenon, short strands of RNA bind to the messenger RNA (mRNA) that delivers protein-building instructions from the cell’s nucleus to the rest of the cell. Once bound, the mRNA molecules are destroyed and their corresponding proteins never get made.

Scientists have been pursuing RNAi as a cancer treatment since its discovery in the late 1990s, but have had trouble finding a way to safely and effectively target tumors with this therapy. Of particular difficulty was finding a way to get RNA to penetrate tumors.

Bhatia’s lab, which has been working on RNAi delivery for several years, joined forces with Hahn’s group to identify and test new drug targets. Their goal was to create a “mix and dose” technique that would allow researchers to mix up RNA-delivery particles that target a particular gene, inject them into mice and see what happens.

Shrinking tumors

In their first effort, the researchers decided to focus on the ID4 protein because it is overexpressed in about a third of high-grade ovarian tumors (the most aggressive kind), but not in other cancer types. The gene, which codes for a transcription factor, appears to be involved in embryonic development: It gets shut down early in life, then somehow reactivates in ovarian tumors.

To target ID4, Bhatia and her students designed a new type of RNA-delivering nanoparticle. Their particles can both target and penetrate tumors, something that had never before been achieved with RNA interference.

On their surface, the particles are tagged with a short protein fragment that allows them to enter tumor cells. Those fragments are also drawn to a protein found on tumor cells, known as p32. This fragment and many similar ones were discovered by Erkki Ruoslahti, a professor at the Sanford-Burnham Medical Research Institute at the University of California at Santa Barbara, who is also an author of the new paper.

Within the nanoparticles, strands of RNA are mixed with a protein that further helps them along their journey: When the particles enter a cell, they are encapsulated in membranes known as endosomes. The protein-RNA mixture can cross the endosomal membrane, allowing the particles to get into the cell’s main compartment and start breaking down mRNA.

In a study of mice with ovarian tumors, the researchers found that treatment with the RNAi nanoparticles eliminated most of the tumors.

Gordon Mills, chair of the systems biology department at the University of Texas’ MD Anderson Cancer Center, says the work is an important step toward generating new targets for drugs to treat ovarian cancer, which is the fifth-leading cause of cancer deaths among women in the United States.

“This approach has the potential to [validate] targets that are deemed ‘undruggable’ using current technologies and to provide sufficient throughput to screen candidates arising from high-throughput sequencing, shRNA and siRNA screens and other screens for novel potential targets,” says Mills, who was not part of the research team.

The researchers are now using the particles to test other potential targets for ovarian cancer as well as other types of cancer, including pancreatic cancer. They are also looking into the possibility of developing the ID4-targeting particles as a treatment for ovarian cancer.

The research was funded by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the National Cancer Institute, the National Institutes of Health, the Mary Kay Foundation, the Sandy Rollman Ovarian Cancer Foundation, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the H.L. Snyder Medical Foundation.

200 page book converted into DNA by researchers

Originally posted by Jed E. Robinson on RoundNews.com on August 17, 2012

Scientists from Harvard University wanted to prove that DNA, the genetic template substance, can be a viable storage solution. They took a 200+ page book that totalled close to 53000 words.

The book also had 11 images and a short javascript code added to its contents.

The scope of Harvard’s research was to see if DNA molecules ca be used to store a large amount of data. DNA can last for thousands of years as opposed to the average harddrive lifespan which is close to 5 years of active use. If DNA is trapped in amber then it can last for million of years.

In order to convert the digital version of the book to DNA the following process was followed:

- Researchers first took the binary code of the book.

- The resulting binary string was analysed bit by bit. A nucleobase was assigned for every bit value.

- The 5.27 million base long DNA strand was synthesized by analysing 96 bases at a time

- The synthesized DNA now contains the entire book. Its weight is one million time less than the weight of a grain of salt.

After the book was converted to DNA, Harvard scientists went ahead and tried to read the content in order to determine how reliable is DNA as a storing medium. Only 10 bits out of the total of 5.27 million were erronated. Current technology offers an easy way to read DNA. There are many commercially available solutions on the market.

DNA is our basis of life. Using it for storing data in the close future is not that far fetched.

Source: https://www.roundnews.com/science/beyond-science/449-200-page-book-converted-into-dna-by-researchers.html

Myriad Genetics BRCA1 and BRCA2 patents upheld in court

Originally posted by bbc.co.uk on August 17, 2012

A court in the US has again backed a biotech company’s right to patent genes which have been isolated from the human body.

Myriad Genetics has patents on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, which are strongly linked to breast and ovarian cancer.

Patents on genes have been repeatedly contested in the courts.

The latest decision by the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals sided in favour of the company.

The patents are valuable as they give the owners exclusive rights to diagnostic tests for the genes. One of the questions in the case was whether isolating a gene makes it different to one still in the body.

Circuit Judge Alan Lourie said: “Everything and everyone comes from nature, following its laws, but the compositions here are not natural products.

“They are the products of man, albeit following, as all materials do, laws of nature.”

The decision was welcomed in a statement from the president of Myriad Genetics Peter Meldrum: “We are very pleased with the favourable decision the court rendered today which again confirmed that isolated DNA is patentable.

“Importantly, the court agreed with Myriad that isolated DNA is a new chemical matter with important utilities which can only exist as the product of human ingenuity.”

However the American Civil Liberties Union, which contested the patents, argued: “Human DNA is a natural entity like air or water. It does not belong to any one company.

“This ruling prevents doctors and scientists from exchanging their ideas and research freely.”

Structure of the BRCA1 protein - Credit: emw/creative commons

Original source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19294050

First ever computer model of a living organism performed

In what can only be described as a milestone in biological and genetic engineering, scientists at Stanford University have, for the first time ever, simulated a complete bacterium. With the organism completely in virtual form, the scientists can perform any kind of modification on its genome and observe extremely quickly what kind of changes would occur in the organism. This means that in the future, current lab research that takes extremely long to perform or is hazardous in nature (dealing with lethal strains of viruses for instance), could be moved almost exclusively to a computer.

The researchers chose a pathogen called Mycoplasma genitalium as their target for modeling, out of practical reasons. For one, the bacterium is implicated in a number of urethral and vaginal infections, like its name might imply as well, however this is of little importance. The bacterium distinguishes itself by having the smallest genome of any free-living organism, with just 525 genes. In comparison, the ever popular lab pathogen, E. coli has 4288 genes.

Don’t be fooled, however. Even though this bacterium has the smallest amount of genetic data that we know of, it still required a tremendous amount of research work from behalf of the team. For one, data from more than 900 scientific papers and 1,900 experiments concerning the pathogen’s behavior, genetics, molecular interactions and so on, were incorporated in the software simulation. Then, the 525 genes were described by 28 algorithms, each governing the behaviour of a software module modelling a different biological process.

“These modules then communicated with each other after every time step, making for a unified whole that closely matched M. genitalium‘s real-world behaviour,” claims the Stanford team in a statement.

Thus, even for an organism of its size, it takes that much information to account for every interaction it will undergo in its lifespan. The simulation work was made using a 128-node computing cluster, and, even so, a single cell division takes about 10 hours to simulate, and generates half a gigabyte of data. By adding more computing power, the computing process can be shortened, however its pretty clear that for more complex organisms, much more resources might be required.

“You don’t really understand how something works until you can reproduce it yourself,” says graduate student and team member Jayodita Sanghvi.

BIG LEAP FORWARD FOR GENETIC ENGINEERING AND CAD

Emulating for the first time a living organisms is fantastic by itself, and is sure to set the ground for the development of Bio-CAD (computer-aided-design). CAD is primarily used in engineering, be it aeronautic, civil, mechanical, electrical and so on, and along the years has become indispensable, not only in the design process, but more importantly in the innovation process. For instance, by replacing the insulating material for a boiler in CAD, the software will imediately tell the engineer how this will affect its performance, all without having to actually build and test it. Similarly, scientists hope to achieve a similar amount of control from bio-CAD as well. The problem is that biological organisms need to be fully described into the software for bio-CAD to become lucrative and accurate.

“If you use a model to guide your experiments, you’re going to discover things faster. We’ve shown that time and time again,” said team leader and Stanford professor Markus Covert.

We’d love to see this research expanded forward, which most likely will happen, but we’re still a long way from modeling a human – about 20,000 genes short.

The findings were presented in the journal Cell.

Sources:

https://www.zmescience.com/medicine/genetic/computer-model-simulation-bacteria-31243/

https://www.newscientist.com/blogs/onepercent/2012/07/first-organism-fully-modelled.html

https://www.cell.com/abstract/S0092-8674%2812%2900776-3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_coli

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycoplasma_genitalium

Transforming cancer treatment

A Harvard researcher studying the evolution of drug resistance in cancer says that, in a few decades, “many, many cancers could be manageable

Predicted probability distribution of times from when treatment starts until resistance mutations become observable in circulating DNA (credit: Luis A. Diaz Jr/Nature)

“Many people are dying needlessly of cancer, and this research may offer a new strategy in that battle,” saidMartin Nowak, a professor of mathematics and of biology and director of the Program for Evolutionary Dynamics.

“One hundred years ago, many people died of bacterial infections. Now, we have treatment for such infections — those people don’t have to die. I believe we are approaching a similar point with cancer.”

Nowak is one of several co-authors of a paper, published in Nature on June 28, that details how resistance to targeted drug therapy emerges in colorectal cancers and describes a multidrug approach to treatment that could make many cancers manageable, if not curable.

The key, Nowak’s research suggests, is to change the way clinicians battle the disease.

Physicians and researchers in recent years have increasingly turned to “targeted therapies” — drugs that combat cancer by interrupting its ability to grow and spread — rather than traditional chemotherapy, but such treatment is far from perfect. Most targeted therapies are effective for only a few months before the cancer evolves resistance to the drugs.

The culprit in the colon cancer treatment examined in the Nature paper is the KRAS gene, which is responsible for producing a protein to regulate cell division. When activated, the gene helps cancer cells develop resistance to targeted-therapy drugs, effectively making the treatment useless.

To better understand what role the KRAS gene plays in drug resistance, a team of researchers led by Bert Vogelstein, the Clayton Professor of Oncology and Pathology at the Johns Hopkins Kimmel Cancer Center, launched a study that began by testing patients to determine if the KRAS gene was activated in their tumors. Patients without an activated KRAS gene underwent a normal round of targeted therapy treatment, and the initial results — as expected — were successful. Tests performed after the treatment broke down, however, showed a surprising result: The KRAS gene had been activated.

As part of the research, Vogelstein’s team analyzed a handful of mutations that can lead to the activation of the KRAS gene. To help interpret those results, they turned to Nowak’s team, including mathematicians Benjamin Allen, a postdoctoral fellow in mathematical biology, and Ivana Bozic, a postdoctoral fellow in mathematics.

Analyzing the clinical results, Allen and Bozic were able to mathematically describe the exponential growth of the cancer and determine whether the mutation that led to drug resistance was pre-existing, or whether it occurred after treatment began. Their model was able to predict, with surprising accuracy, the window of time from when the drug is first administered to when resistance arises and the drug begins to fail.

“By looking at their results mathematically, we were able to determine conclusively that the resistance was already there, so the therapy was doomed from the start,” Allen said. “That had been an unresolved question before this study. Clinicians were finding that these kinds of therapies typically don’t work for longer than six months, and our finding provides an explanation for why that failure occurs.”

Put simply, Nowak said, the findings suggest that, of the billions of cancer cells that exist in a patient, only a tiny percentage — about one in a million — are resistant to drugs used in targeted therapy. When treatment starts, the nonresistant cells are wiped out. The few resistant cells, however, quickly repopulate the cancer, causing the treatment to fail.

“Whether you have resistance prior to the start of treatment was one of the large, outstanding questions associated with this type of treatment,” Bozic said. “Our study offers a quantitative understanding of how resistance evolves, and shows that, because resistance is there at the start, the single-drug therapy won’t work.”

The answer, Nowak said, is simple: Rather than the one drug used in targeted therapy, treatments must involve at least two drugs.

Nowak isn’t new to such strategies. In 1995 he participated in a study, also published in Nature, that focused on the rapid evolution of drug resistance in HIV. The result of that study, he said, was the development of the drug “cocktail” many HIV-positive patients use to help manage the disease.

Such a plan, however, isn’t without challenges.

The treatment must be tailored to the patient, and must be based on the genetic makeup of the patient’s cancer. Perhaps even more importantly, Nowak said, the two drugs used simultaneously must not overlap: If a single mutation allows the cancer to become resistant to both drugs, the treatment will fail just as the single-drug therapy does.

Nowak estimated that hundreds of drugs might be needed to address all the possible treatment variations. The challenge in the near term, he said, is to develop those drugs.

“This will be the main avenue for research into cancer treatment, I think, for the next decade and beyond,” Nowak said. “As more and more drugs are developed for targeted therapy, I think we will see a revolution in the treatment of cancer.”

Sources:

https://www.kurzweilai.net/transforming-cancer-treatment

The molecular evolution of acquired resistance to targeted EGFR blockade in colorectal cancers, Nature, 2012, DOI: 10.1038/nature11219

American lifestyle breeds depression

Although widely known, new research shows how excessive amounts of television watching combined with a sedentary lifestyle is a sure recipe for depression.

Unfortunately, these are the very activities that generally describe the typical American lifestyle, excluding poor nutrition and pharmaceutical dependency. Therefore, is it any surprise that depression and mental illness run rampant in the United States, with half of all Americans to be diagnosed with a mental disorder within their lifetime?

The study, conducted by the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, observed thousands of older women with varying degrees of physical activity and television watching. What the study found is that the women who exercised the most and watched the least television were least likely to be diagnosed as being depressed, with physical activity having the largest impact.

The researchers’ findings, published in the American Journal of Epidemiology, stated that women who reported exercising most were about 20 percent less likely to develop depression than those who rarely exercised.

Depression feeds on excessive television watching, fended off by physical activity

Including close to 50,000 women, the study participants filled out health surveys every 2 years from the year 1992 to 2006. The women were asked to fill out the time they spent watching TV each week in 1992, and answered questions about how often they walked, ran, biked, and swam between 1992 and 2000. In addition, the women were instructed to report any new diagnosis of clinical depression or medication taken to treat depression.

The analysis started in 1996, including only women who did not have depression. Over the next decade, there were 6,500 new cases of depression.

‘Higher levels of physical activity were associated with lower depression risk,’ wrote study author Michel Lucas, from the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston.

While peak physical activity slashed the risk of depression by 20%, women who watched 3 hours or more of television per day were 13% more likely to develop depression than those who hardly watched television at all.

 

Source: https://www.activistpost.com/2011/11/american-lifestyle-breeds-depression.html

Is empathy in our genes?

A large part of how we relate to people emotionally may be hardwired into our DNA. A new study suggests that character traits such as being open, caring, and trusting are so strongly linked to a certain gene variation that a total stranger, simply by watching us listen to another person, may be able to guess whether we have the variation with a high degree of accuracy.

Previous studies have linked several personality traits to variations in this gene, which acts as a docking station (or receptor) for the brain chemical oxytocin — often referred to as the “love hormone” because it plays a role in social behaviors such as bonding, empathy, and anxiety.

People who have two “G” variants of this oxytocin receptor gene tend to have better social skills and higher self-esteem, research has shown. Conversely, those with at least one “A” variant tend to have a harder time dealing with stress, worse mental-health outcomes, and a greater likelihood of being autistic.

“We’ve known that genotype can influence personality, but we’d only ever studied what goes on inside a person — things like behavioral scales and heart-rate measurements,” says Serena Rodrigues Saturn, Ph.D., a senior author of the study and an assistant professor of psychology at Oregon State University, in Corvallis. “This is the first time anyone has observed how different genotypes manifest themselves in behaviors that complete strangers can pick up on.”

To explore the relationship between a person’s genetics and demeanor, Rodrigues Saturn and her colleagues recruited 23 romantic couples, and videotaped them while one partner recalled and discussed a time of suffering in their lives. The other partner, who had given a saliva sample to determine his or her genotype, was simply asked to sit and listen.

The researchers then showed 20 seconds of each video clip to a group of 116 people. None of the viewers knew the video subjects, and they watched the clips with the sound off so they had no knowledge of the situations being discussed. They were then asked to rate how kind, caring, and trustworthy the listening partner seemed, based only on visual cues.

“They looked for things like nodding along with their partner, holding eye contact, keeping an open body posture,” Rodrigues Saturn says. “Those people were judged as more social and caring, as opposed to others who seemed much more aloof.”

Although they expected to find some association between the subjects’ genotypes and their rankings, the researchers were “blown away” by how accurate the observers’ intuition actually was, Rodrigues Saturn says. Out of the 10 people who were ranked as “most prosocial,” six had the GG genotype, and of the 10 ranked “least trusted,” nine were carriers of at least one A variant.

The findings were published today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Keith Kendrick, Ph.D., a neuroscientist at the University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, in Chengdu, says it’s important to note that genes besides the oxytocin receptor gene — not to mention other, non-genetic factors — influence social behavior as well. Oxytocin receptors have been shown to be modified by a person’s environment, for example, so life experiences presumably play a large role too, he says.

“Just because you have an ‘A’ version of this one receptor gene clearly does not mark you down as a completely unsocial individual,” says Kendrick, who was not involved in the study. “Obviously many different genes contribute to something as complex as social behavior, but it is interesting that this particular one appears to be so influential.”

One genotype isn’t necessarily better or healthier than the other, Rodrigues Saturn says. Although scientists used to refer to the gene’s “A” variant as a “risk” variant (because it increases risk of autism and social dysfunction), many experts now think of the variations as just that: variations that may—along with many other forces — play out in personalities.

“It’s important to understand that some people are… naturally more held back, or may be overcome by their own personal stresses and have a hard time relating to others,” Rodrigues Saturn says. Putting these people in more comfortable environments that naturally induce the production of oxytocin may help to coax them out of their shells and help them feel more “warm and fuzzy,” she says.

 

Source: https://edition.cnn.com/2011/11/15/health/empathy-genes/index.html