Tuesday, August 26, 2008

Did Life Evolve in Ice? | Arctic & Antarctic | DISCOVER Magazine

Did Life Evolve in Ice? | Arctic & Antarctic | DISCOVER Magazine

One morning in late 1997, Stanley Miller lifted a glass vial from a cold, bubbling vat. For 25 years he had tended the vial as though it were an exotic orchid, checking it daily, adding a few pellets of dry ice as needed to keep it at –108 degrees Fahrenheit. He had told hardly a soul about it. Now he set the frozen time capsule out to thaw, ending the experiment that had lasted more than one-third of his 68 years.

Miller had filled the vial in 1972 with a mixture of ammonia and cyanide, chemicals that scientists believe existed on early Earth and may have contributed to the rise of life. He had then cooled the mix to the temperature of Jupiter’s icy moon Europa—too cold, most scientists had assumed, for much of anything to happen. Miller disagreed. Examining the vial in his laboratory at the University of California at San Diego, he was about to see who was right.

As Miller and his former student Jeffrey Bada brushed the frost from the vial that morning, they could see that something had happened. The mixture of ammonia and cyanide, normally colorless, had deepened to amber, highlighting a web of cracks in the ice. Miller nodded calmly, but Bada exclaimed in shock. It was a color that both men knew well—the color of complex polymers made up of organic molecules. Tests later confirmed Miller's and Bada’s hunch. Over a quarter-century, the frozen ammonia-cyanide blend had coalesced into the molecules of life: nucleobases, the building blocks of RNA and DNA, and amino acids, the building blocks of proteins. The vial’s contents would support a new account of how life began on Earth and would arouse both surprise and skepticism around the world.

JournalFire Blog » Blog Archive » Welcome to Journalfire

JournalFire Blog » Blog Archive » Welcome to Journalfire

Welcome to Journalfire

Until recently, large media publishers controlled what we read, listened to, and watched. Now blogs, podcasts, and Youtube have put the users in control. Unfortunately science has lagged behind. Publishers still act as the primary filter of scientific information, with some top-tier journals rejecting up to 83% of submitted papers even before they are sent to peer review. Combine this with the fact that grants and faculty positions often hinge on the number of publications one has in these top journals, and the result is that a handful of people have tremendous impact on the global scientific agenda. Journalfire exists to put scientists back in control of science.

Journalfire provides a centralized location for you to share, discuss, and evaluate published journal articles. You, the scientists, are put in charge of determining what studies are significant and noteworthy.

Use Journalfire to create groups to share articles and ideas with scientists in your lab or from around the globe. Currently Journalfire links to every article in the PubMed database, with access to more databases on the horizon. When discussing articles, you decide whether the discussion is public or private, and whether or not to use your name or remain anonymous. Journalfire creates a permanent open access record of each discussion and links it directly to a specific article or group. See what articles your colleagues are discussing in their groups, and see what comments are being made about the papers that interest you most, including your own.

Journalfire provides a new way to assess scientific merit. The value of a journal article is often first assessed by the name of the journal in which it appears. Unfortunately, this is typically determined by fewer than five people. Journalfire offers a more democratic approach. By enabling you to evaluate published articles, the combined opinion of the scientific community can be used as a measure of scientific merit.

Journalfire search results take into account several criteria, including the amount of discussion an article has generated and the rating an article has received. Thus Journalfire enables you to quickly find the papers that other scientists are talking about, or papers that may have otherwise slipped through the cracks.

Journalfire was created by a group of graduate students who were frustrated with the current system of scientific discourse and publication. We believe Journalfire is a step in the right direction towards a more open and democratic scientific community. If you’d like to join us, visit journalfire.org.

Monday, August 18, 2008

By amplifying cell death signals, scientists make precancerous cells self-destruct

via KurzweilAI.net

By amplifying cell death signals, scientists make precancerous cells self-destruct

When a cell begins to multiply in a dangerously abnormal way, a series of death signals trigger it to self-destruct before it turns cancerous. Now, in research to appear in the August 15 issue of Genes & Development, Rockefeller University scientists have figured out a way in mice to amplify the signals that tell these precancerous cells to die. The trick: Inactivating a protein that normally helps cells to avoid self-destruction.

Thursday, August 14, 2008

Drug that uses the body's cells to blast cancer | Mail Online

Drug that uses the body's cells to blast cancer | Mail Online:

"Cancer patients have seen their tumours blasted into submission by a new drug which harnesses the power of their own immune cells.

The 'serial killer' treatment completely eliminated some tumours and shrunk others resistant to existing therapies.

Further successful trials could lead to blinatumomab being on the market in less than five years."