What I Learnt This Week 10: Genetics has its touch on the brain, Flu against cancer, Microbes on human waste, Old antibiotics against infections & Smoking ain't as it seems.

in steemstem •  7 years ago  (edited)
I appreciate everyone that has kept coming to view this series. This series is 10 weeks old today which means the first series was on November 25TH, 2017 - that's a long time to keep up with a particular series, I say thank you. So, for those that are just joining the series, in this series, I summarize what I learnt during the week that's from Monday to Friday in a single post except there's need for it to be separated. So, let's get to it.

Monday: Genetics is the biggest determinant of the level of one's intelligence

brpw.jpg
Genetics has its touch on the brain

We all know the importance of intelligence. No one wants to be associated with dull people, we all want to be associated with intelligent and progressive people. The importance of intelligence cannot be overemphasized. We get tested at the point of changing schools, job interview et cetera to know our level of intelligence.

Most people boldly say they've read far and wide and they know a lot of things. No one is disputing that, just know genetics is the major determinant. Some people read all day and still not get anything and someone might read for only a few minutes and would learn a great deal. At least I have a friend that has that ability. So, what does he owe that to?? How much he reads?? Of course not.

[1] Before now, we know genetics is responsible for about 30% of the intelligence of man and the remaining 70% depends on him. But an intentional team of scientists has now conducted another research into this and they found out most of the intelligence man is determined by genetics. That is adding the common genetic variant and the rare genetic variant together, they sum up to more than 50% of the intelligence in man.

[2] From my research, I was able to find out that the 30% effect of genetics on our intelligence is not totally wrong, it's just for the common genetic variant. So, scientists at the University of Edinburgh and Gottingen were able to found out able the percentage offered by the rare genetic variant after the analysis of thousands of genetic markers in the DNA of about 2000 people. After that, they summed it up.

[3]


We used two methods to measure the effect that rare variants had on intelligence. By combining the effect of both rare and common variants, more than 50 per cent of the differences in intelligence between people could be traced to their genes.

Dr. David Hill




[You can read more]

Tuesday: Flu against cancer


images.jpg
3D image of the flu virus

Remember the flu I talked about last week? I have to talk about it today again but this time in a new dimension. Flu, as discussed last week, is something that claims lives but as it is now, scientists are working on bringing the good out of it. Scientists plan to use flu to attack pancreatic cancer. How? Read On!

This is one big discovery for us. I mean, I'm tired of saying one of the best all the time. Just when I say that, I find something better after a while, so....

[4] The scientists modified the flu virus to target pancreatic cancer and effectively and kill the cancer cells. This newly discovered technique is a wonderful one and if used with the existing therapy we have for pancreatic cancer, then, there will be an improved chance of survival against the disease.

[5] The modified flu virus kills pancreatic cancer cells with little side effects to surrounding healthy tissues, we don't know what side effects though but beyond that, the scientists were ahead to engineer the flu virus so it can be delivered into the blood to track down the cancer cells that might have spread to other parts of the body.

[6] There's only need for more clinical tests but I think this is a hit not miss. Imagine converting harmful things in our environs to something good?? Better days are just ahead, I've always said, with the increased rate of discoveries on cancers, there's a possibility of finding a cure someday.

[You can read more]

Wednesday: Microbes to make human waste edible.


microbes.jpg
Microbes


We envisioned and tested the concept of simultaneously treating astronauts’ waste with microbes while producing a biomass that is edible either directly or indirectly depending on safety concerns

Christopher House
Professor of geosciences, Penn State





This is really weird but it is in consideration of the astronauts on deep space missions. The concept is to break down human waste (liquid and solid) to grow food with the help of microbes, also reducing the growth of pathogens.

[7] This discovery was made due to the multiple challenges facing deep space scientists that might have to spend months or even years on a trip. How do they carry enough food from Earth? That would be very expensive or even the hydroponic method of food generation uses energy, water and still takes up valuable mass like a whole room. Well, I just thought you should know in case you're wondering what led to something this extreme.

Of course, the scientists had to put their idea to test to be certain if their idea would work out. [8] They got some artificial waste (solid and liquid), made out an enclosed cylindrical system, and got some microbes to do the job. The waste was broken down as expected in an anaerobic digestion - methane was produced.

[9] Methane can be used to grow microbes, methylococcus Capsulatus. This microbe is usually used as food for animals. The M. capsulatus grown contained 52% protein and 36% fats and this of course, is nutritious enough and it means one of the problems facing deep space travel has been marked out.

[You can read more]

Thursday: Old antibiotic can help against worst superbugs.


IMBCooperantibioticshutterstockLOWRES.jpg
Octapeptines

An antibiotic discovered long before I was born has been found to be useful. The antibiotic was discovered 40 years ago and has suffered neglect since then until now - maybe because they found no use for it? Read On!

[10] Now, they have been found to be useful against infections caused by dangerous superbugs. The antibiotic was found to possess properties that could help in the manufacture of new effective drugs to save victims of life-threatening infections of the superbugs.

[11]The antibiotic, octapeptin was discovered in the 1970s at a time where there were lots of antibiotics, most of which were new. The antibiotic researchers as at then just didn't happen to choose octapeptin as one of the antibiotics to work on.

[12] Even now, scientists just didn't go back to look for it, they had no choice because the infection has become immune to meropenem and colistin - the two antibiotics used to treat the infection and so, there was a need to get something else. I know you must be thinking why scientists didn't think the infection would be resistant to octapeptin soon? The answer is simple! Octapeptin's antibiotic strength is superior to that of Colistin and even less toxic to the kidney.

[You can read more]

Friday: You don't need to cut down your smoking, you need to stop.


cigar-720x540.jpeg
Smoking ain't the way it seems

Oh! You still think you need to cut down your smoking? No, I think you need to stop. I hear people everywhere saying, smoking a few cigarette daily is still good at least it's not that you are smoking a pack or something.. Well, that's true, you're not smoking a whole pack but have you considered the risks attached?

[13] A new study done by the University College of London reveals that the risk attached to smoking a single cigarette is just as much as that of smoking 10. You might think it's just a single stick but even that single stick is accompanied by a huge risk of developing coronary heart disease and stroke.

[14] You need to do more than cutting down, you need to stop. To buttress the point, the scientists studied about 141 cases of smokers smoking one, five or twenty cigarettes per day. It's easy to have thought the risk would be proportional to how much one smokes but surprisingly, people who smoke a single cigarette per day when compared to those that smoke 20 had 46% risk of heart disease and 41% risk of stroke instead of 5%, if it was by proportions.

Two things to keep in mind:
[1] There is no safe degree of smoking
[2] The risk of heart disease and stroke stop after of few years of quitting.

[You can read more]

Thank you for coming around!!

That little boy, @pearlumie.

DQmPtnKZW6cQWBAzpA8yiqTDXSsVH9zEUyxFiek2kGEoA8g.gif

Gif created by @rocking-dave


Proud Member of @steemstem

Join us on discord and rub minds with other science geeks.


Proud Member of @genesis-project

You want to join genesis-project, contact @ehiboss, @samminator, @ememovic, or @camzy, and please ignore the scammers, you don't have to pay to join @genesis-project.


Proud Member of @air-clinic

Join air-clinic's discord server. Medical practitioners needed. Anybody from any field is free to join, we do daily lectures and consultation services are available.

Contact @nairadaddy for more info.

Image Sources

References

[9] The use of methane to grow methylococcus capsulatus

[10] The usefulness of octapeptines

[11] Octapeptine was discovered in the late 1970s

[12] Octapeptine superior to colistin

[13] A single stick has the same effe as 10 sticks of cigarette

[14] The Case study

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Thats what smokers don't understand, they don't consider the risk attached
Nice article bro keep steeming

Oh! You still think you need to cut down your smoking? No, I think you need to stop. I hear people everywhere saying, smoking a few cigarette daily is still good at least it's not that you are smoking a pack or something.. Well, that's true, you're not smoking a whole pack but have you considered the risks attached?

Thank you for always coming around bro..

All these diseases stuffs when smoking will be calculated on the basis of pack year. Calculated by mulitplying number of cigarette smoked per day and number of years the person has smoked. I guess the article would spark more if you added these things I guess so !

I don't think there's need for that. What's the essence of saying the number of times they smoke a year? It's pointless. I made sure the most important points were stated, the things they need to know about. If they want to know how many times they smoke a year, they can get a calculator for that.

Well, thank you. I appreciate your presence..

Great post my friend.

nice

wow! this great

Great post, very interesting! Keep up the good work

I have a question
Is smoking good for the body
What are benefits of smoking

But to me smoking destroy bladders n leads to early death

Can u please put me through @ pearlumie

Hi, I had really appreciated your article, it was very interesting , clear and so well organized! :) if you want let's check my blog too and...follow me

  ·  7 years ago Reveal Comment