Preparing for the pandemic
This week, Scitable’s blogger, Henry Stanley asks whether some research is too dangerous to be published:
In November 2011, a Dutch group succeeded in making a highly pathogenic variant of avian flu (H5N1) which, if released, could cause a global pandemic. Ever since, a storm has raged as scientists and governments worldwide attempt to deal with the findings and how they should be safely disseminated—if at all.
H5N1 electron micrograph
The January 19 issue of Nature gave a cross-section of views from biosecurity, infectious disease and global health experts. What do you think? Should the methodologies of this type of research be published?
Solar Cells
Paige Brown is discussing solar cells and the obstacles preventing them from becoming the alternative energy source to fossil fuels:
One of the greatest barriers to the use of solar cell technology as a competitive alternative energy source to fossil fuels is cost. High costs come from expensive materials and complex traditional production processes required to make solar cells (see image below, conventional process).
Other hurdles to cheap industrial-scale production of solar cells include the requirement of toxic or explosive chemicals, vacuum environments, long processing times, large amounts of material waste and high labour costs of production. Can you name any more? Feel free to join in the conversation.
Public Information Officers
This week’s Soapbox Science guest blogger is Matt Shipman, a public information officer at North Carolina State University, where he writes about everything from forensic entomology to computer malware. In his post he discusses the roles of Public Information Officers (PIOs), laying out some guidelines for what he deems scientists, science writers and PIOs should expect from each other:
Researchers, you should expect a good PIO to give you an opportunity to review any news releases about your research. I am a flack at a large university. I write about everything from forensic anthropology to chemical engineering. It would be foolish of me to presume I could write about such a variety of topics without making a mistake. Even PIOs who focus on specific research areas make mistakes, as humans are wont to do.
Continue to the post to hear more of his thoughts. What do you think?
GM insects
The News Blog report that an article published this week in PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases suggests that companies and scientists developing genetically modified (GM) insects for release in the wild need to be more open with safety data:
A number of field trials of GM insects have already taken place. The most prominent are recent tests in the Cayman Islands and Malaysia involving male mosquitoes which were engineered to be sterile. They were conducted by the Oxford, UK firm Oxitec (see ‘GM Mosquitoes wipe out dengue fever in trial’ and ‘Female mosquitoes tricked by spermless males’). Notably, confusion over the scope of a small 2010 release in Malaysia raised concerns that trials were proceeding without adequate public consultation (see ‘Letting the bugs out of the bags‘).
Image of Aedes aegypti mosquito, the species Oxitec introduced in Malaysia and the Cayman Islands, via Wikimedia Commons.
Do you agree? Should there be more clarity with regards to safety data? Feel free to join the discussion.
Chronic disease
Spoonful of Medicine are examining a report published this week by the US Institute of Medicine (IOM) which calls for an overhaul of the way public health departments conduct surveillance and treatment of chronic diseases ranging from arthritis to depression. The report warns that chronic disease, which accounts for three quarters of healthcare spending in theUnited States, is a looming crisis:
The report, Living Well with Chronic Illness, focuses on nine chronic conditions. In addition to cancer and type 2 diabetes, diseases for which substantial public health initiatives already exist, it names mental illnesses such as dementia, post-traumatic stress disorder, schizophrenia and depression. Such diseases decrease the productivity and quality of life of millions of Americans, but public health departments do not adequately address such illnesses, the report argues, in part because surveillance systems fail to assess the needs of patients with chronic disease. For example, little information exists about how people with chronic illnesses such as arthritis access healthcare and what interventions are most effective in increasing their productivity and decreasing the cost of managing the disease.
You can find out more about this report in the post.
Asteroid Probe
According to the News Blog, after nearly six years after it was proposed, Japan’s Space Activities Commission has finally approved the development of Hayabusa 2, successor to the Hayabusa asteroid probe, which returned samples to Earth in 2010.
Hayabusa 2 will aim for 1999JU3, a small asteroid about 900 metres in diameter. The asteroid is slightly bigger than the first mission’s destination, Itokawa, but it is supposedly more primitive and contains more organic or hydrated materials, which may provide clues about the origins of the Solar System. The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) plans to launch Hayabusa 2 in 2014 or 2015, land on the asteroid in 2018 and return to the Earth in 2020.
You can find out more about the probe and the asteroid, in their report.
The winner is….
Margit Muller – PhD student in pharmacology at the University of Copenhagen has won Nature Chemistry’s December “In Your element essay competition.” The Sceptical Chymist blog reveals more:
Since its discovery in 1807 by Sir Humphry Davy – who was on a rather impressive element-discovering spree – sodium has amazed chemists. Reports dating back to the 1850s already describe its spectacular reactivity, including its reaction with water that contributes to entice generations of (mischievous) school kids to chemistry according to some Reactions pieces. Among other applications, it is also what makes for pretty yellow flames in fireworks.
You can find the article here (subscription required) and learn how crucial sodium is in biological processes in their blog post.
GrrlScientist links out to a video of professor Martyn Poliakoff talking about winning the prestigious 2011 Ron Nyholm Prize for his role in chemistry education:
Continue to her post to find out more.
Technology takeover
With the potential for lab books to be substituted with tablets, Eva Amsen, in her latest post, is questioning whether technology can protect against fraud:
Is there a control equivalent in digital lab notebooks that can check with absolute certainty which person made which notes and when they were approved? There might be, but I don’t see that emphasized as a key point of digital lab notebooks. The emphasis is always on ease of finding information, tracking projects, or planning experiments – but the tools are offered as a replacement for something of which one of the key functions is security and accountability.
Are the next cases of lab fraud going to involve hacking into lab notebooks?
Finally, feel free to join in the growing online conversation, or take a look at the picture below depicting Eva’s paper-centric workspace from her lab in 2005. What will a lab in 2020 look like?
