Tuesday, October 6, 2015
Thursday, October 1, 2015
Mars Shows Signs of Having Flowing Water, Possible Niches for Life,
NASA Says
In the past few days NASA has
confirmed there are signs of flowing water on Mars. It has been known for a while that millions
of years ago oceans and rivers existed on the Martian surface and that there
are large amounts of ice at the polar ice caps but now they have found proof
for liquid water in what they call recurring slope lineae. These lineae are dark streaks on the Martian
surface that darken and lengthen in the summer and fade in the winter. The most important discovery though is that
this cycle recurs which hints towards flowing water in the warmer summer
climate and ice in the cooler winter.
The problem is that confirming that there is in fact liquid water has
been difficult and required scientists to come up with new ways of identifying
it. They were finally able to confirm
the presence of water by identifying hydrated salts (salts with water in their
bonds) in four different locations, all with lineae. The salts were only present during the times
when the streaks were darker which has led researchers to believe that it is
salt water. These salts are an important
discovery in many ways. First, because
they require recent sources of liquid water to form which confirms the presence
of liquid water on mars and second because salts have a property of lowering
the freezing point of water which provides an explanation for water being able
to flow in the much colder climate of mars.
The discovery of water is extremely important because it allows for the
possibility of life in the form of microorganisms. Many scientists disagree on whether or not
this would be possible but there is no way to know until we can send a rover to
look. The problem is, the rover on mars
and the next rover scheduled for 2020 will not be able to examine the life on
mars because they will not be properly sterilized and could contain microorganisms
from earth that could contaminate the Martian microorganisms. Scientists are afraid they may have already
done so because they have found what they believe to be lineae within a few
miles of the unsterilized rover, Curiosity.
This discovery is extremely important because it has now
possibly legitimized sending humans to Mars in the near future. The now much more real possibility of life on
mars is also very important and could lead to the discovery of a new type of
microorganism that cannot be found on earth.
I enjoyed reading this article which was very well written
and researched. The author included many
quotes of leading scientists at NASA and other experts in this field which
provided many different points of view and insights on this new discovery. This allows the reader to start to form his
or her own opinion which makes it a very interesting read. One of the primary criticisms I have is that the
author seemed to jump around a lot and not focus as directly on the presence of
water. He seemed to get off topic easily
by going into excessive detail on topics that were not important in informing
the reader about the discovery of water on Mars.
Chang, Kenneth. "Mars Shows Signs of Having Flowing
Water, Possible Niches for Life, NASA Says." The New York Times. The New
York Times, 28 Sept. 2015. Web. 02 Oct. 2015.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/science/space/mars-life-liquid-water.html>.
"Here's why NASA's Mars rovers are banned from investigating that liquid water"
Tommy Maldonado AP Biology
Current Event: “Here’s why NASA’s Mars rovers are banned from investigating that liquid water”
Recently, scientists discovered chemical evidence liquid water on the surface of Mars. This groundbreaking discovery presents the possibility of life on our neighboring planet. However, the article, “Here’s why NASA’s Mars rovers are banned from investigating that liquid water,” explains why we will not be able to investigate this water for years to come. As of now, NASA’s Curiosity rover is more or less 50 kilometers from the site of Martian water. However, the rover is not allowed to go anywhere near the site, due to an international treaty signed in 1967. The reasoning for such a disappointing conclusion is that the rover is not sterile. This is because it had to travel about 225,000,000 kilometers from Earth to Mars, possibly picking up dirt, dust, and other microbes that have contaminated the rover. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty, out of fear of contaminating the Martian water, forbids “anyone from sending a mission, robot or human, close to a water source in the fear of contaminating it with life from Earth.” Many people may ask why NASA doesn’t just sterilize the robots; there is a simple answer. NASA’s process for sterilization involves using “heat and radiation that would wipe out anything and everything that managed to survive the journey from Earth.” This process would damage the electronics of the robot and cause it to become unusable. While there are hopes of solutions to this problem, such as the possibility of astronauts or more developed robots that can use 3D printing, for now, nothing can be done.
This article provides the reader with a glimpse at what the future will be like, in both a positive and negative way. It shows that there might be a possibility of life on another planet, a question wondered by countless people today. It also provides readers who are aspiring rocket scientists with a new job: learning how to sterilize the rovers. It calls upon innovative thinkers in our society to come up with ways to examine the water without contaminating it. Additionally, it gives the reader a sense of appreciation for the perfect environment our planet provides us with. On a more negative note, this contamination conundrum has shown us that we still have simple problems, like how dirty an object is. Also, by showing that we have a lot of improvement to do on our technology, the question of life on Mars is known only to be answered many years from now. Overall, there are a few direct effects on the people, but there are major changes in our outlook of the universe. Many questions about life outside of Earth that once seemed preposterous now seem more and more realistic.
On the whole, I loved this article. I found that it was to the point and easy to follow. The author used very simple language that appealed to a wide audience of people, and he did not lose the reader’s attention by rattling off incoherent scientific jargon that has no meaning to the reader. Additionally, he quoted various rather well-off scientists in the field conversed her. In my opinion, this made the article more credible. One thing I didn’t like about the article was that there was a good amount of spelling errors in it. I found this to be quite unprofessional and distracting from the main point of the article. I was also rather disappointed with the lack of information on how the presence of water was discovered on Mars. Also, while the language was simple enough to understand, it also seemed too simple to me. The author said things like “stay the hell away from the water”, “sterilise the crap out of its rovers”, and “Gross, Curiosity. Just go stand over there, will you?” Such unprofessional phrases, like the spelling errors, distracted me from the main point of the article. Finally, I felt that the article did not include enough on the origin of the 1967 treaty. Being that these were the major drawbacks of the article, I believe they are the greatest sources for improvement. The article could be made better by being proofread for spelling errors and unprofessional phrases, elaborating more on how the presence of water was discovered on Mars, and explaining the origin of the 1967 treaty. On the whole, I loved reading this article and found it to be very interesting!
Citation:
"Here's Why NASA's Mars Rovers Are Banned from Investigating That Liquid Water."
ScienceAlert. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 Oct. 2015.
Study Offers Support for Cancer Treatment During Pregnancy
Natalie Kister
Study Offers Support for Cancer Treatment During Pregnancy
This article, Study Offers Support for Cancer Treatment During Pregnancy, written by Catherine Saint Louis, describes the new research information on cancer treatments on expecting mothers and the effects the treatments had on their children. This topic has often been debated in the cancer research and health world-the question as to whether it is healthy for a baby and its mother to undergo chemotherapy while the mother is still carrying the child. Performed at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in Belgium, this study found no significant differences in the hearts and brain function for children whose mothers had undergone treatments while pregnant. Dr. Frédéric Amant, the head author of this project, said, “To some extent it is surprising because cancer treatment is quite toxic...and we know most chemotherapy drugs cross the placenta.” Prior to this study, when a mother carrying a baby was diagnosed with any type of cancer it was most often suggested that they either terminate their pregnancy if it were early enough, or go through induced labor in order to begin treatment as soon as possible. Now, the researchers at Katholieke Universiteit Leuven hope neither of these precautions will be needed to be taken. When testing this experiment, all babies were within their second and third semester, as the birth defect rate of a first semester embryo would have been to great. At 18 months and 3 years, each children was examined with a test known as the Bayley Scales of Infant Development. The scores these babies received were compared with a control group-babies born on the same timeline but with no treatments given to their mothers. Those treated for cancer did not have any type of higher score on these tests-rather it was determined that it was the children’s prematurity that led to certain scores. Dr. Amant states, “Prematurity was the problem for these children, but chemotherapy is not.” As well as testing brain functions, the children’s hearts were also tested using electro and echocardiography. It was found that the groups had no significant differences in their heart’s functioning and its ability to pump blood. Although this study had limitations-the relatively small sample size and the types of chemo drugs tested-the doctors in this research project remain hopeful that the results will offer reassurance and “cautious optimism” to doctors and mothers that cancer treatment during pregnancy is not detrimental to the fetus.
As the rate of cancer in the world increases, the likelihood of a mother being diagnosed during pregnancy also increases. As of now, only about 1 in every 1000 mothers are diagnosed during a pregnancy. With the growing rates, the information found in this study can be used to reassure mothers and give the option of being treated and delivering a healthy baby. The new information found can give hope to any mother-we can avoid the sad cases where a baby is left without a mother because of the lack of cancer treatment during pregnancy.
I thought that this article was very well written and displayed information in a logical order that was easy for a reader to understand. Any new terms or things the average person may not have known about were explained in simple language. The article flowed nicely from idea to idea and direct quotes from the researchers were featured throughout it, which I thought was a nice thing to have. To have made this article better, I think that quotes or opinions from the mothers who underwent this treatment would have been interesting. I would have loved to hear how their opinion changed from beginning to end and what their motives were for participating in this study.
Louis, Catherine Saint. "Study Offers Support for Cancer Treatment During Pregnancy." The New
York Times. The New York Times, 28 Sept. 2015. Web. 01 Oct. 2015.
ing-pregnancy.html?action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=stream&module=stream
_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=20&pgtype=sectionfront>.
Plastic Oceans: What Do We Know?
Plastic Oceans: What Do We Know?
Plastic is a human-made substance that has been accumulating in the ocean upon disposal and harming aquatic species for years. In order to limit its usage, Britain is planning to impose a charge on plastic bags. Many organisms such as birds have been found dead with plastic particles in their bodies due to the 8 million tons of plastic that is dumped into the ocean every year. Plastic causes organisms to choke and miniscule particles of plastic can be toxic to their bodies. Plastic does not break down easily, so it persists in the ocean and through the food chain. Among other ways, it can also enter the ocean by being blown off of nearby landfills. When humans eat seafood, we are also ingesting the plastic particles that have accumulated in their bodies. Scientists speculate that anyone who eats an average amount of seafood consume about 11,000 plastic particles a year. Although the new charge on plastic bags will contribute towards eliminating the threat that plastic poses on our oceans, much more has to be done globally to have any effect on the ocean.
The article provides information about how plastic substances in the ocean are affecting the aquatic organisms and human health. It connects this information with society because it is explaining Britain’s decision to introduce a charge for plastic bags. Britain’s new legislation will give people an incentive to limit their plastic usage in order to avoid the negative consequences that it has on humans and the environment. Because plastic is an artificially manufactured substance, humans need to be mindful about how it is disposed and produced.
Although the article was easy to understand, I think that it could have been better reinforced with statistics and facts. The vocabulary used and the logical flow of the article was very clear. However, the claims could have been backed up with further scientific proof to sound more credible. Statistics do not back up claims such as, “Some of the stuff has been blown off landfill sites that are close to the shore,” which weakens the article. If more factual information was incorporated, it would be beneficial to the article.
Shukman, David. "Plastic Oceans: What Do We Know?" BBC News. N.p., 01 Oct. 2015. Web. 01 Oct. 2015. <http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-34414710>.
Toxic Algae Outbreak Overwhelms Polluted a Ohio River
Toxic Algae Outbreak Overwhelms Polluted a Ohio River
The Ohio River has long been the most polluted waterway in the United States. However, in the past 5 weeks, nearly two thirds of the river, or 636 miles, has been overrun by a toxic algae known as microcystin. The previous algae explosion in the river, for contrast, only covered 40 miles. Although there is currently only an advisement to stay away from the river, the algae is capable of causing diarrhea, vomiting, and liver damage in addition to killing animals. This can have drastic consequences: a similar incident in Lake Erie caused Toledo to shut down drinking water supplies for 4 days. The algae bloom is as a result of phosphates and nitrates that come from fertilizer and feed the bacteria. In hot sun and still water, conditions that the Ohio River has been facing, the bacteria will flourish in population. Although there is only a minor increase in phosphates within the river, it is believed that the changing weather patterns in the area may have helped cause this mess. In order to combat these algae blooms, states are cracking down on phosphate use in lawn fertilizers and the federal government is attempting to reduce fertilizer runoff and use in general.
This article truly strikes close to home. This is an issue that we face within America- we cannot detach ourselves from it. These toxic algae blooms have extreme risk not only for animal populations, but for humans as well. Declining animal populations due to deaths from the algae will severely disrupt our ecosystem, and if a major city was forced to shut down its drinking water supplies it could spell disaster for millions of people and the economy of the city. Toxic algae is an issue that we must address as a nation before we have worse consequences than simply having to stay away from rivers.
I felt that this was an very well written, informative article. I enjoyed how, in addition to explaining the effects being felt so far from the Ohio River, he also explained the effects that were felt from Lake Erie. I also enjoyed how he compared this bloom to the previous one. Finally, I enjoyed how he showed that the government regulating bodies were trying to prevent these blooms. I think he could have elaborated more upon how fertilizer runoff occurs and how it can be prevented and explained how close the people along the Ohio River are from having their water shut off.
Wines, Michael. "Toxic Algae Outbreak Overwhelms a Polluted Ohio River." The New York
Times. The New York Times, 30 Sept. 2015. Web. 01 Oct. 2015.
-river.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&_r=0>.
Biology and Ideology: The Anatomy of Politics.
Buchen, Lizzie. "Biology and Ideology: The Anatomy of Politics." Nature.com. Nature Publishing Group. Web. 01 Oct. 2015. <http://www.nature.com/news/biology-and-ideology-the-anatomy-of-politics-1.11645>.
It has been thought that people’s political views are based on social factors, like their environment and their peers. However, there were recent studies that showed that the political views of people may actually be affected by their biological settings, like their genes, hormone levels, and their neurotransmitter systems. This study began in 1986 when Nicolas Martin, a geneticist, and his crew tested the attitudes of twins concerning issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage, the death penalty, and immigration: they compared the results of the genetically identical twins with those of fraternal twins of the same sex, who only shared 50% of their genes on average. The fraternal twins did not share as much similarities of political beliefs as the identical twins. The team used twins because they would have most likely grown up in the same environment, meaning it was a more controlled experiment. This suggests that genes were what affected their opinions. However, this experiment was mostly ignored until the early 2000s, when some political scientists, Hibbing and John Alford, at Rice University examined the experiment and did some tests themselves with US twins. They had similar results as Martin, which shows “strong correlations between genetics and political views.” This caught the attention of few researchers, and like the other scientists, they used the twin method which all ended with all similar results. However, there are some uncertainties that they have to figure out; the problem with the studies is that they cannot completely control the environmental factors because “compared with fraternal twins, genetically identical twins are more likely to have the same friends and to maintain regular contact as adults. Furthermore, parents, friends and teachers often treat identical twins more equally than fraternal twins. All of that makes it hard to unpack how much genes and environment each contribute to the shared political attitudes of identical twins.” Few attempted to solve this situation by showing that the beliefs of identical twins were the same, even if they do not spend much time together. However, this study is still facing criticism especially since they have not found out what sections of the genome actually contribute to which political side somebody would be. They are “looking for sequences linked to a behaviour or trait. But researchers in this area are only just beginning to use such resource-intensive strategies.” They have done more tests; this time, linking political preferences and change to personality and emotion, which can be more understandable.
This information can help politicians decide how they can play with the voters’ primal emotions to gain votes. However, more importantly, by recognizing the fact that people’s views may not be rational just because of who they are, the public and the politicians can maybe “develop more respect for those with opposing viewpoints.” John Hibbing hopes that by understanding this concept, the fact that some people just experience the world differently, people overall can be more forgiving and not so outspoken against another person; they may be more civil and accepting of differences. This discovery is also important just because it connects modern politics to basic human biology; turns out that even the subjects that aren’t usually associated with biology eventually comes down the human genome and DNA. With more research, this study can deeply affect our views of who we are as an individual.
This article was fascinating and easy to understand even with the extensive amount of information that was provided. It included many quotes from the scientists who performed the experiments along with those who disagreed with it. Though it was a long read, the author made it easier by adding subtopics, so I could clearly tell what she was going to be discussing in the next few paragraphs. However, I feel like the author quickly skimmed through the experiments, but personally for me, I would have liked to know more about the science behind this phenomenon. There would have to be more evidence and experiments that need to be done before it can really be confirmed. Something that this article could have included would maybe be more specific on how the experiments were actually done and include data from the various experiments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)