The Science Thread

I think I found it and am going to read it. Thanks for the share!

https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a62045571/how-wormholes-shape-our-reality/

 

AI has made its presence known in the awarding of the 2024 Nobel prizes.

Google’s DeepMind researchers among recipients of Nobel prize for chemistry

 

Amazing photographs at the link below, entries into the 50th annual Nikon Small World contest

Some 2,100 photos, from participants in 80 countries, were submitted this year and judged not only for their microscopic beauty but also their potential significance.

Crab spider eyes, truffle spores, pollen — micro science wonders in photos

The image awarded first prize was of “differentiated mouse brain tumor cells.”

 

Well, after 20 years of doing Anesthesia, I finally put my first labor epidural in a man. None of the other docs in my group can say that, I'm sure.

 

Good for you! My daughter has severe lower back scoliosis with the bend located where the labor epidural would normally be placed. The anesthesiologist went for it, achieved docking, and later asked my daughter if he could show the films to his wife, also an anesthesiologist, because he was pretty chuffed with managing the procedure.

 

I've never had problems putting in epidurals on patients with scoliosis, but often times they get inadequate distribution of local anesthetic and end up having a lot of pain despite the catheter being properly placed. It's kind of unavoidable and I tell the people this up front so it doesn't come as a surprise. I hope your daughter had a good experience, however.

 

She did, thank you.

 

Shape Of A Single Photon Revealed For First Time Thanks To New Computer Model

 

My two favorite scientists are Professor Brian Cox - astrophysicist, and Proffessor Lindy Durrant - Cancer scientist and drug development specialist.

Cox will often say that science is as much about what we do not know as what we know; discovery.

However it seems that Durrant is a little further along the curve of understanding in her particular subject than many others - Immunotherapy

In the last month Nov 24, Professor Lindy Durrant out Of Nottingham University has seen further stunning results of her Phase 2 trial for SCIB1 vaccine to treat Advanced Melanoma (unresectable skin cancer in subjects that are at a late stage) including 80% progression free survival, 20% complete response, disease control rate of 84% and an objective response rate of 72% when the vaccine SCIB1 was used in combination with double checkpoints. Just to demonstrate perspective, double checkpoints alone can give up to a 50% objective response rate and are currently the standard of care. The cohort sizes are small (41 subjects in each) and the figures are not yet final but there is reason to believe that these results could be durable as the above results are at 25 weeks. These results follow a very successful previous trial of the drug as a monotherapy in 2017.

This woman is a real trail blazer... Not only is she achieving arguably the best result of any current novel cancer vaccine but she is doing it all the wrong way! Unlike her peers that have far superior finances and resources as they are all major pharmaceutical companies. Durrants vaccine is based on a DNA platform. Her contemporaries are all using mRNA platforms which are currently lagging way behind. DNA in this case are leading the way.

And if you think that SCIB1 is just a one off, think again. There is a completely separate vaccine called Modi 1 in earlier trials for multiple solid tumors that is tentatively tracing in its siblings footsteps. It has not yet demonstrated such amazing results but it is ticking along quite nicely and only time will tell.

And if that were not enough. Durrant has developed five separate anti bodies. Each of these are highly specific and can be used in a number of modalities. Two have attracted deals from Genmab totalling $1.2bn. Genmab are widely viewed as a foremost leading anti body developer second only to Seagen.

I wonder if Rachel Reeve (British Chancellor) will ask Durrant if the British Government can do anything to help? Doubt it...

 

Also a pretty decent drummer.

 

Christmas BBC Science lectures upcoming if you get sick of Turkey and Shakin Stevens…

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00pmbqq/broadcasts/upcoming

If you search the archives I believe Prof Brian Cox has done these in the past

 

I was shocked today to read in an article from The Guardian - with the alarming title: The situation has become appalling: fake scientific papers push research credibility to crisis point -
that last year more than 10,000 fraudulent science research papers were retracted from journals. The use of the words “sham” and “fake” and “bogus” in the article cried foul.

The article pointed to “paper mills” that turn out papers which:

In 2013 there were just over 1,000 retractions. In 2022, the figure topped 4,000 before jumping to more than 10,000 last year.

But - of this last total, more than 8,000 retracted papers had been published in journals owned by Hindawi (founded in Egypt, purchased by Wiley & Son 2021) – its publications now paused.

So, it seemed sensationalist for the Guardian article to smear all of science.

Of course, fraudulent science must be called out whenever it is found:

But - the Guardian article left me with the impression that all the retractions were due to falsifying scientific results. A little more of my own research revealed the article was not quite forthcoming. According to Retraction Watch, plagiarism and duplicate publication make up a very hefty portion of the retractions.

Some rates of retraction for duplicate publication:

Finland = 37.5%; China = 29.4%; Tunisia = 28.6%; Japan = 22.8%; Iran = 21.4% … USA = 13.1%; Sweden = 0%

Some rates of retraction for plagiarism:

Italy = 66.7%; Turkey = 61.5%; Iran = 42.9%; France = 38.5% … China = 16.8%; USA = 8.5%; Finland and Germany = 0%

While plagiarism is a serious offense, it

So, I was disappointed in the Guardian article disingenuously inflaming anti-science feeling at a time when faith in science is plummeting.

 

Thanks for this. The credibility of scientific data is all important. It is a big undertaking to read and evaluate a paper. Discrediting such information in anyway just muddies the waters. I research biotech devices and novel theraputics for personal investment purposes. Pretty much lesson one is make sure the articles are peer reviewed and even better from known sources such as Universities. Lesson two is kick the hell out of the tyres! (tires). So a good researcher should be looking in the right places and for certain things.

This is what can happen when scientific data is unverified or falsified...How is this for a rabbit hole. Please read here.

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

If you are trying to promote liquid biopsies then it will be a lot harder due to Theranos.

 

Thanks for sharing. And now they are in prison, where they belong.

Yes. Any piece of fraudulent science affects the whole.

 

Remember that "substance detector" that was sold to troops in Iraq that were basically a hollowed out toy? That wasn't so much falsified scientific data but a lot of very gullible people. No one thought "hmm, this feels suspiciously light". Maybe they thought "we've paid $1500 for it, better not break it by opening it up, just to, you know, check".

 

I had to look it up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADE_651#:~:text=However%2C%20investigations%20revealed%20that%20the,security%20forces%20for%20security%20checkpoints.

Apparently, the brains behind that was a man named Jim McCormick, and he got sentenced to ten years for his fraud.

 

A former police officer, as well!

 

Wow. I don't think I've ever heard of this! Thank you.

This Jim McCormick sounds like a real piece of work. Not only did he profit from selling what was basically a dowsing rod, but he put innumerable lives in danger in many different countries. He got what he deserved. No sympathy here, none whatsoever.

Just for fun, I looked up other pseudosciences on wiki and ... ugh. People actually believe this junk ... and they vote ... and reproduce.

 

NORAD is the North American Aerospace Defense Command - and they have been tracking Santa Claus.

Currently, Santa is over Venezuela, with over 5 billion presents delivered.

https://www.noradsanta.org/en/map

 

It's long been known that in human adults, the brain is dimorphic - that there are structural differences between a male and a female brain.

Now, new research shows that these differences exist as early as birth.

Males have more white matter, which means more axons, which means more connections, which translate to faster communication.

Females have more grey matter, which means more nerve cell bodies, which translates to greater intellectual capability.

Now - how to reconcile this with our evolutionary roles? Males tend to act ... and females ponder?

 

Since the role of males was to protect the group, they had to make quick decisions about whether danger was approaching or present and react before they were eaten by a bear (and let the rest of the group to flee or come and help).

 

Well, just looking at the anecdotal evidence of me and my husband, he was much better at making decisions than me. "Just put aside the influences, and make a decision," he used to say to me.

 

In the environment that our ancestors lived in, being decisive and impulsive was probably an advantage. But it's also the reason why men fall for those promotions in supermarkets more than women do, where they put something that seems like a good deal at eye level, you know, "formerly $29.99, now only $57.99 for 2!!".

 

$1 Million Prize Offered To Whoever Deciphers This 5,000-Year-Old Script