Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The New Qualcomm - write what you like thread. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Dough who wrote (1067)	11/18/1999 8:06:00 AM
From: Ibexx	Respond to of 12232

From NYTimes, November 18: ______ November 18, 1999 Scientists Link a Single Gene to Longer Life in Mice -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Forum Join a Discussion on Aging -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- By NICHOLAS WADE n a finding that may yield a sharp insight into the genetic reasons for death, a team of Italian scientists Wednesday reported discovery of a gene that exerts major control over the life span of mice. The effects of the corresponding gene in humans is unknown, but experts in aging called the findings a milestone that could someday lead to drugs that postpone the effects of aging. The new gene fits into a pattern of other recent findings about aging that highlight the role of oxygen damage to the tissues as a major driver of the aging process. Oxygen may be the breath of life, but in the body it creates chemical byproducts, free radicals, that can corrode the cell's working parts and corrupt the information in its DNA data bank. If the damage is too severe, cells are genetically programmed to self-destruct, a fail-safe mechanism to prevent damaged cells turning cancerous. The gene studied by the Italian team makes a protein that triggers the self-destruct process in response to oxygen damage. Mice genetically engineered to lack the trigger protein turned out to live 30 percent longer than normal, with no apparent harm. The gene's effect was discovered by Dr. Pier Giuseppe Pelicci of the European Institute of Oncology in Milan, together with scientists at the Institute of Pathology in Perugia, Italy, and the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York. Their findings are reported in the journal Nature. Experts in aging described the report as a significant step forward, although all said the finding needed to be better understood, and extended to different strains of mice, before it could be considered decisive. "This is a fascinating start on what could prove an incredibly exciting pathway for research," said Dr. Steven N. Austad of the University of Oregon. "I think it is a milestone that we can alter a single gene in a mouse and make it live longer, without any obvious side effects," said Dr. Leonard Guarente of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Guarente described the Italian research as "proof of principle that we will be able to dissect the aging process in mammals," and said that whether this or some other gene is the key to increasing longevity, "at least this says there is hope." Despite the obvious differences, mice are quite similar to people at the genetic level and provide valuable insights into their fellow mammal. The new gene's role in protecting cells from oxygen-related damage is particularly striking because it fits in with findings from lower laboratory organisms like fruit flies and roundworms. Biologists who have made these animals live longer by genetic manipulation have found that their cells are less likely to die after oxygen-related damage. Also, the single known treatment that makes ordinary mice and rats live much longer -- severe restriction of the calories in their diet -- is one that cuts down on their cells' metabolism of glucose and the associated oxygen-related damage. The gene studied by the Italian researchers makes a protein that forces the cell to die when oxygen damage is detected. The mice that were genetically incapable of making the trigger protein presumably lived longer because their cells, even though suffering some degree of oxygen damage, were no longer being zapped by the hair-trigger self-destruct mechanism. Pelicci said the trigger belongs to a class of proteins for which many inhibitory drugs are known, and that it should not be too difficult to tailor a drug to block it. Dr. Pier Paolo Pandolfi of Memorial Sloan-Kettering, who helped genetically engineer the mice, said that such a drug applied in the form of a cream might reverse the aging skin's wrinkles and blemishes. Other biologists said the discovery, if confirmed, offered the hope of more important interventions. Caloric restriction seems to impede a whole set of aging processes, and drugs that inhibit the trigger protein might produce the same wide range of benefits as caloric restriction but without the pain, these experts said. Few people are able to maintain a diet with 30 percent fewer calories than a normal diet. Should caloric restriction prove to increase life span in primates as well as mice -- monkey studies are in progress -- a drug that mimicked the effects of caloric restriction would be valuable. A surprising aspect of Pelicci's work is that so far he has found no downside in blocking the manufacture of the trigger protein. In all other laboratory animals whose longevity has been enhanced, there have severe penalties, usually in the form of reduced fertility. Calorically restricted mice do not breed at all. Surprisingly, the fertility of Pelicci's mice appears to be normal. There must be some deficit, however, because genes that do not benefit their owner are soon lost. Both Pelicci and other scientists expect he will find some adverse effect of losing the gene, perhaps a fertility effect too mild to have shown up yet, or some disadvantage not evident in the protected conditions of a laboratory. The expected downside is likely for evolutionary reasons to occur in the young. Experts on aging believe that if the gene works the same way in humans, with luck the downside of inhibiting it would not be a problem in treating older people. ____ Daytraders of Q*: there is no rush in view of the above. Ibexx

To: John Dough who wrote (1067)	11/18/1999 10:32:00 AM
From: A.J. Mullen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12232

Your instincts are correct. Water contracts on warming between, I remember roughly, 0 and 4 degrees Celsius. As ice melts, the temperature doesn't change, so nothing happens if it's floating. If it rises above the magic number of (I think) four degrees Celsius, then it sinks below any water that is cooler than four degrees. A bigger effect is the thermal expansion of warmer waters getting warmer still. Mrs. Thatcher, that well known liberal, was very concerned about Global Change when she was Prime Minister. She was a scientist before she was a politician.

To: John Dough who wrote (1067)	11/19/1999 3:53:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12232

Why melting North Pole ice doesn't raise sea level. The part sticking up above the surface is held up there because the stuff under the water is less dense than the surrounding water, so it floats at exactly the right level so the extra weight held above water matches the difference in weight between the water and the ice under the water. As the ice melts, it shrinks as it turns to water. So it takes up less space, so all the stuff above the surface and all the stuff below the surface fits into the same space that was taken up by the submerged part. The weird shrinkage of water as it cools from 20 degrees down to 0 degrees means it reaches a maximum density at about 4degrees, then expands again as it cools further and expands further on forming ice. That's to do with the electrical bonds between the water molecules which pull the molecules together. The Web is great - just did a search and here's an explanation: edie.cprost.sfu.ca As AJ wrote, the big impact on sea level is heating of water. 4 kilometres of ocean getting 4 degrees warmer would cause huge flooding!!! So would ice melting on Greenland and Antarctica and running into the sea! But there is plenty of land at higher levels. So no real worries. The DCF on the real estate at sea level would show that the value of it would be well expired by the time it gets wet. There will be some migration needed from some low lying countries. Mqurice