Blog Post

Scientists are Making Headway in the Treatment of Neurodegenerative Diseases

Cecilia Santostefano

Nilotinib was created to treat one of the dozens of types of leukemia, but doctors are hopeful that it will slow down the progression of two diseases of the brain.[1] Currently, there is no treatment that can delay or stop the neurodegenerative diseases known as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s.[2]

The term “neurodegeneration” refers to the progressive damage of brain cells, which results in functional impairments.[3] In 2015, researchers at Georgetown University Medical Center initiated a preliminary study in which they administered a small dose of nilotinib to patients with Parkinson’s disease as well as dementia.[4] This drug prompts cells to eliminate faulty parts, including the components that are associated with many brain diseases.[5] By eliminating these components, the director of the Georgetown program, Fernando Pagan, says he may be able to stop the advancement of these types of diseases. Following what appeared to be success in the preliminary trial, Georgetown planned to launch larger clinical trials for individuals with Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s.[6] The studies are currently enrolling patients and will be completed within the next couple of years.[7]

 

[1] Jon Hamilton, Cancer Drug That Might Slow Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s Headed For Bigger Tests, NPR, (Mar. 15, 2017), http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/03/15/520170960/cancer-drug-that-might-slow-parkinson-s-alzheimer-s-headed-for-bigger-tests.

[2] Id.

[3] Sally Robertson, What is Neurodegeneration? News Medical, (Jan. 21, 2015), http://www.news-medical.net/health/What-is-Neurodegeneration.aspx.

[4] Hamilton, supra note 1.

[5] Id.

[6] Id.

[7] Id.

Cryonics: A solution to ensure survival of human tissue, or a feeble-dream of fantasy

Thomas Carlon

Throughout much of Hollywood, cryopreservation has been depicted as “deep-freezing” whole human bodies in cyrochambers, only to be easily awoken moments after the chamber has been opened. At what point is this just fantasy as compared to real-life. In today’s standards cryopreservation holds a pivotal role in preserving human tissue – such as transplant organs. However, what does it take to freeze human tissue, and is it even theoretically possible. The issue of deep-freezing human tissue does not rest on the freezing part itself, but rather the warming process that must occur to reawake the tissue cells without damaging them.

To freeze tissue cells the process must begin quickly, in order to avoid the cells from decaying further and causing irreparable harm to the organs and tissue cells. The process begins by placing the tissue on dry ice, to keep the organs or body at low temperatures. Once the organs are at a storage facility, the tissue and organs are infused with cyroprotectants, these cyroprotectants are essentially anti-freeze the prevent ice crystals from forming on the tissue and inside the organs.[1] The rationale behind this is to prevent these ice crystals from killing cells which would eventually lead to further decay and harm to the tissue and organs. The next step is that the organs must be cooled, slowly.[2] This is accomplished by cooling the tissue and organs in liquid nitrogen at a rate of one degree Celsius every hour, eventually reaching the final temperature of -130 to -196 degrees Celsius after about two weeks.[3] These low temperatures are required so that can cells survive and not dehydrate after death, because uncontrolled dehydration and freezing will cause cells to die, causing harm to the tissue and organs.[4]

The issue with deep-freezing tissue is the rewarming, or awakening of the cells. Through current warming techniques, the tissue and cells crack or crystallize during the warming process, rendering them ineffective for use during organ transplantations.[5] The British Broadcasting Corporation noted that so far there is no evidence or guarantee that technology can rewarm the cells  without causing harm. However, the Scientific American journal reported that researchers discovered a technology that could rewarm large pieces of tissue without major damage.[6] This is accomplished by implanting nanoparticles evenly throughout the tissue, and when exposed to an magnetic field, begin acting as tiny heat generators.[7] This technology is just a concept so far, and needs to be refined. Nonetheless, this could be fascinating new discovery in supporting organ transplants.

As humankind continues to evolve. It is always fascinating to learn what new discoveries, or inventions have been made, whether this technology becomes reality is yet to be known. However, the evolution of this technology could spark a new generation of research and experiences not yet known to us.

 

[1] Philippa Roxby, What does cryopreservation do to human bodies?, British Broadcasting Corporation, November 18, 2016, http://www.bbc.com/news/health-38019392.

[2] Id.

[3] Philippa Roxby, What does cryopreservation do to human bodies?, British Broadcasting Corporation, November 18, 2016, http://www.bbc.com/news/health-38019392.; see also Rose Eveleth, Cryopreservation: ‘I freeze people to cheat death’, British Broadcasting Corporation, August 22, 2014, http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140821-i-will-be-frozen-when-i-die.

[4] Philippa Roxby, What does cryopreservation do to human bodies?, British Broadcasting Corporation, November 18, 2016, http://www.bbc.com/news/health-38019392.

[5] Id.

[6] Andrew Joseph, New Advance May Help Organs Survive Deep Freeze, Scientific American, March 2, 2017 https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-advance-may-help-organs-survive-deep-freeze/.

[7] Id.

The Rush to Save Dark Data

Emma Fusco

The Trump administration has made clear the disdain for evidence that shows how human activity is affecting the planet.  The administration is now proposing hefty budget cuts for government agencies including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Environment Protection Agency.  Fear is now buzzing among researchers that government data will be deleted as a “cost-conscious” measure.

But let’s make one thing clear: it is illegal to destroy government data.  However, agencies have the autonomy to revise websites and create other barriers in accessing the information.  

We have already seen drastic changes to websites of federal science agencies.  These changes are reflective of the publicly stated priorities of the new administration which raised the concern of the vulnerability of the information painstakingly collected over decades which cost hundreds of billions of dollars.  This information remains solely in the hands of the government, which spans across thousands of servers which may not be backed up and may be impossible to find.  
Some activists refer to this as “dark data” because as Maxwell Ogden phrased it, “It’s like dark matter; we know it must be there but we don’t know where to find it to verify… If they’re going to delete something, how will we even know it’s deleted if we didn’t know it was there?”

WikiLeaks Seeks to Work With Companies in Wake of CIA Data Leak

Aiden Scott

After the disclosure of over 8,000 documents which “demonstrate vulnerabilities in smartphones, televisions,and software” identified by the CIA Jullian Assange has announced that he wants to work with companies to close these vulnerabilities in their technology. If the release by WikiLeaks was legitimate, then it would reveal that the CIA “has the ability to break into individual devices and intercept messages before they can be encrypted.” In response the CIA has not confirmed or denied the authenticity of the release, but maintains that the “american public should be deeply troubled by any disclosure designed to damage the Intelligence Community’s ability to protect America.” This comment highlights the implicit troubles that WikiLeaks could cause for intelligence agencies by closing off vulnerabilities in devices such as smart phones, it could in theory be more difficult for the CIA to monitor the activities of a suspected terrorist. However with the growing concern about privacy in America, and with Assange remaining in the Ecuadorian embassy in London we will have to wait to see what steps both sides take as matters progress.

Life Beyond Earth: Is interstellar space travel to TRAPPIST-1 possible?

Thomas Carlon

In humans’ search for extraterrestrial life, we often find ourselves wondering if human life could exist elsewhere in the universe. Over the years, nearly 3,500 planets have been discovered orbiting stars in the universe, however, none have been quite as publicized as the TRAPPIST-1 solar system.[1] The discovery of TRAPPIST-1 could ignite new approaches to researching planets outside of our solar system, and potential interstellar travel.

The TRAPPIST-1 solar system is almost identical to that of our own solar system, it has eight orbiting planets, three of which could sustain human life. The orbiting planets of TRAPPIST-1 have radii between three-quarters and one times that of Earth, with masses ranging from 50%-150% of Earth’s mass.[2] Moreover, because all the planets are smaller than 1.6 times that of Earth’s radius, the planets of TRAPPIST-1 are more likely to be rocky worlds, as opposed to gaseous planets such as our very own Neptune. Furthermore, the possibility of sustaining human life is exponentially increased, because three of the planets d, e, and f are within the temperate region of the sun.[3] Thus, the possibility of liquid water existing on the surface is high.[4]

While our search continues for habitable planets like Earth. The search always focuses on the potential for the presence of water, typically ice worlds that have melted are preferable. For example, Earth’s surface is comprised of 71% water, however, water only makes up 0.1% of the planet’s mass.[5] Moreover, because Earth’s seafloor is separated mostly by water from the atmosphere, this allows for a carbon-silicate cycle to form – which essentially acts as a thermostat to adjust the carbon dioxide warmth in Earth’s atmosphere.[6]  However, this could prove troublesome for the temperate planets of TRAPPIST-1. The planets of TRAPPIST-1 are situated so close to their star that the planets are potentially in “tidal lock.” Where the face of the planet is permanently turned towards the star, where one face is in a state of constant day, and the other face in night. Moreover, the associated weather patterns could evaporate all water and eliminate the atmosphere if the winds of the planets are unable to redistribute the heat. Finally, the planets are seemingly in circular orbits – which could trigger a second form of heating called “tidal heating.”[7] Essentially, a small ellipticity in a planet would cause the star’s gravity to strengthen and weaken during the year, flexing the planet like a Bug Out Bob, generating vast amounts of heat.

Given all this information, it is still possible that life may be habitable on the temperate planets of the TRAPPIST-1 solar system. The key factors being that the planets contain water, that the surface is not entirely covered by water, it contains a carbon-silicate cycle, and that the planets remain in their seemingly circular orbitals patterns. However, reaching the solar system may prove to be the largest hurdle to overcome.

TRAPPIST-1 sits, patiently awaiting it’s arrival of human life, 39 light-years away from Earth. Placed in a more contextual quantity, 229 trillion miles (369 trillion kilometers) away from Earth.[8] To put this distance in perspective, New Horizons, the fastest spacecraft ever launched from Earth, flew past Pluto in 2015 around 32,000 miles per hour (“mph”).[9] Which would take New Horizons around 817,000 years to reach TRAPPIST-1.[10] Furthermore, NASA’s space shuttle travels around the Earth around 17,500 mph, and would take 1.5 million years to reach TRAPPIST-1.[11] Essentially, it is impossible for humans to travel to the TRAPPIST-1 solar system anytime soon. Even if Stephen Hawking’s theoretical Starshot’s interstellar probes[12] were used to launch humans to TRAPPIST-1 it would still take less than 200 years – which would mean your ancestors would witness the arrival to TRAPPIST-1, not you.

With today’s technology, the feasibility of reaching TRAPPIST-1 to further explore the habitability of that solar system is zero. Humans might one day see the potential to travel vast distances across the universe, like in Interstellar. However, humans should stick closer to home for space exploration – the colonization of Mars sounds like a better start.

 

 

[1] Elizabeth Tasker, It’s our Solar System in miniature, but could TRAPPIST-1 host another Earth?, The Conversation, February 24, 2017 2:40am, https://theconversation.com/its-our-solar-system-in-miniature-but-could-trappist-1-host-another-earth-73482.

[2] Id.

[3] Id.

[4] Id.

[5] Id.

[6] Elizabeth Tasker, It’s our Solar System in miniature, but could TRAPPIST-1 host another Earth?, The Conversation, February 24, 2017 2:40am, https://theconversation.com/its-our-solar-system-in-miniature-but-could-trappist-1-host-another-earth-73482.

[7] Id.

[8] Hanneke Weltering, TRAPPIST-1: How Long Would It Take to Fly to 7-Planet System? LiveScience, February 23, 2017 (2:47pm ET), http://www.livescience.com/57993-trappist-1-alien-planets-travel-time.html.

[9] Id.

[10] Id.

[11] Id.

[12] Karl Tate, How Breakthrough Starshot’s Interstellar Probes Would Work (Infographic), Space.com, April 12, 2016 (6:07pm ET), http://www.space.com/32551-breakthrough-starshot-interstellar-spacecraft-infographic.html.

EPA to pull back on fuel-efficiency standards for cars, trucks in future model years

Gurshamsheer Kailey

The Environment Protection Agency (EPA) intends to withdraw final determination on strict fuel-efficiency standards for future cars and light trucks. Standards for model year 2022 to 2025 would require 54.5 miles per gallon average for the cars and light truck fleet. EPA though agreed to review the 2022-2025 standards, decided against it and finalized the standards a week before Trump took office.

Marge Oge, who directed the EPA’s office of transportation and air quality from 1994 to 2012 said that agency’s decision was made on sounds science and analysis and that the Trump administration would come to the same conclusion if they rely on facts and science – that 2025 standards are achievable and will save consumers trillions in fuel costs.

California is the only state that is allowed to set higher, tighter standards under the Clean Air Act. However, the new administration is considering revoking this power from California by an executive order which could spur a major legal fight.

In response to the proposal, eight energy, environmental and science advocacy groups implored Scott Pruitt. EPA Administrator, to uphold the standards as clean car standards have reduced carbon pollution and saved drivers money.

See Juliet Eilperin & Brady Dennis, EPA to pull back on fuel-efficiency standards for cars, trucks in future model years, The Washington Post (March 3, 2017), https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/epa-to-pull-back-on-fuel-efficiency-standards-for-cars-trucks-in-future-model-years/2017/03/03/c4406b0c-0054-11e7-99b4-9e613afeb09f_story.html?utm_term=.c5e33e5393a9

NY Times: A Lawsuit Against Uber Highlights the Rush to Conquer Driverless Cars

Teal Johnson

Waymo (Google’s cousin company under their parent entity, Alphabet) filed a lawsuit in federal court against Uber accusing a former employee of planning to steal trade secrets regarding autonomous vehicles.  There is a rush to create self-driving cars because companies such as Alphabet and Uber view this as critical technology that may upend the automobile industry.

Anthony Levandowski is at the center of this litigation because he worked at Google for pioneering the autonomous car project for 9 years.  He left Google in January 2016 and now works for Uber.  He is accused of retrieving information from a confidential server with designs of crucial technologies used for autonomous vehicles.

Uber believes that this lawsuit is just a “baseless attempt to slow down a competitor.”  Uber said that self-driving technology has been Mr. Levandowski’s life passion and has worked on it since college.  The race to self-driving automobiles continue and this lawsuit will be one to watch.

See Mike Isaac & Daisuke Wakabayashi, A Lawsuit Against Uber Highlights the Rush to Conquer Driverless Cars, N.Y. Times (Feb. 24, 2017), https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/24/technology/anthony-levandowski-waymo-uber-google-lawsuit.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Ftechnology&action=click&contentCollection=technology&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront

Limits to the International Reach of U.S. Patent Laws

Justin Farooq

Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court held for a California company in a patent infringement case that confines the international scope of U.S. patent laws.[1] The justices held, unanimously, that the company’s delivery of a single part of a patented invention for assemblage in a different country did not infringe patent laws.[2]  The California life science company delivered an enzyme used in DNA analysis tests to a company in London and merged it with numerous other components to make kits sold all over the world.[3]  Promega Corp., a company based in Wisconsin, sued claiming that the DNA analysis kits violated a U.S. patent.

At first the federal judge said the law did not cover export of a single component, giving $52 million to Promega, but then the federal appeals court specializing in patent cases reversed the judgement.[4]  They determined that a violation occurs when “all or a substantial portion of the components of a patent invention” are supplied from the United States to a foreign location, and writing for the high court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the law “does not cover the supply of a single component of a multicomponent invention.”[5]

Big Pharma: The Reputation Falls

Annie Millar

Recently, issues have arisen arguing that large pharmaceutical companies exist simply to steal our money and endanger the poor by immensely skyrocketing prices of pharmaceuticals. Most of this is a result of Martin Shkreli, the CEO of Turing Pharmaceuticals, who drastically increased the price of Daraprim from $13.50 a pill to $750 a pill. As a result, the general public was outraged and other large pharmaceutical companies attempted to distance themselves from the actions of Shkreli. Merck CEO Ken Frazier spoke on behalf of the pharmaceutical company when he said:

“I think it is really important to our industry to make it clear that he is not us. We are a research-based pharmaceutical industry.”

When one scandal occurs in the pharmaceutical business, it tarnishes the entire industry. Part of this is likely due to the fact that many people have a natural disdain or distrust for the pharmaceutical industry. Medicine is expensive, treatments are expensive, and many die daily due to the inability to afford pharmaceuticals or treatments. When a mess up occurs in this sector, the public just marks it as another flaw of “big pharma.”

As a result, large pharmaceuticals have a bad reputation, and it is up to them to help instill faith in the general public and rebuild that reputation. How they do that is still up for debate.

See John LaMattina, Big Drug Companies Should Secede From The Pharmaceutical Research And Manufacturers Of America, Forbes Magazine: Pharma & Healthcare (Jan. 27, 2017).

Personal Airplane Television Screens Likely to Fade Away

Lindsey Marie Round

While the overall trend worldwide seems to be to increase the amount of technology that individuals encounter daily, airlines may have a different idea in mind. The New York Times reports that many airlines are considering doing away with the television screens that are frequently found on the backs of the seats in an airplane.[1] Alternatively, the content typically available via these screens will be available to customers through streaming to their own personal devices.[2] One disadvantage to this decision may include the airline companies not being able to gain access to the newest movies, which they currently can obtain 1-2 months before they are released to the public for purchase.[3] In addition, customers will not be able to watch a movie or television show while they are doing work or performing other functions on their laptops since the laptop will be necessary to view the movie or show.[4] Furthermore, customers who do not bring a smartphone, tablet, or laptop on their flight will lose access to this amenity. However, this change is likely to only affect domestic flights and the longer flights will retain the personal screens.[5] For better or worse, this change will likely occur, but it will likely take years to implement so customers should not expect to see these changes in the very near future.

 

[1] Christopher Mele, Airlines Phasing Out Screens Because You Are All on Your Devices, N.Y. Times (Feb. 16, 2017), https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/16/business/streaming-flights-movies.html.

[2] Id.

[3] Id.

[4] Id.

[5] Id.