Magnetic nanodots may lead to a ‘library on one chip’
US researchers have created magnetic nanodots that can store one bit of information, which equates to more than one billion pages of information in a one square inch chip.
Nanowerk/North Carolina State University: http://www.nanowerk.com/news/newsid=16034.php
Patent rubbish for companies to own genes
Opinion piece. Patents on genes: necessary legal tools, or putting lives at risk?
The Age: Opinion piece by Leslie Cannold and Luigi Palombi asking how human attributes be deemed corporate property?
Check the comments
There are some interesting comments – 26 of them last time I looked.
Silenced genes behind iP stem cells’ limitations
US scientists have found a cluster of inactive genes in induced pluripotent stem cells that may be responsible for their limitations compared to embryonic stem cells.
Phys Org: http://www.physorg.com/news191416342.html
Note: The research has provided important clues to how to develop iPSCs that are equivalent to embryonic stem cells, which are for now the gold standard in stem cell research re: their ability to develop into any of the body’s cells.
Reference
Stadtfeld, M. et al. Aberrant silencing of imprinted genes on chromosome 12qF1 in mouse induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature advance online publication 25 April 2010 | doi:10.1038/nature09017
Food security rates high as global challenge: Survey
Food security is an issue that looms large in the minds of the world’s leading scientists. Will this translate into any action or are there too many human-inspired hurdles?
Food security looms large in the minds of the world’s leading scientists as a pressing concern for us humans. This one of the results from a New Scientist survey of scientists from the InterAcademy Panel, the global network of the world’s science academies, that recently met at the Royal Society in London.
Food security ranked second on a global level and third on a national level on a long list of concerns facing humanity. It is interesting to note that at a global level nearly double the scientists from low income and developing nations (20 versus 11) said food security was a primary concern. A t national level the difference is even greater: 21 scientists from low and developing nations placed it top of the concern heap compared to just five from the rich nations.
Time to act
Although many of these scientists will be in fields unrelated to any agricultural-based sciences it does highlight that it is probably something we act on sooner rather than later.
But….
I have come across two contrasting views this week that don’t bode well for anyone doing anything about this anytime soon: One from Julian Cribb in a feature mentioned in the previous TechNyou blog post, the second from the South Australian Genetic Food Information Network on a post entitled GM Food Fibs.
Julian Cribb is doing the rounds to promote his new book, but he is aptly qualified to comment on this stuff. He fears we face a new famine if we don’t double R&D efforts in agriculture, which has been on a steady decline the past few decades. He suggests we double global investment in agricultural science, estimating we need to lift the total agrifood R&D spend to at least $80 billion. As a comparison, Cribb says we spend about $1500 billion on weapons.
The section from the SA Gen Food Network’s post is in response to the alleged fib that GM foods are needed to save millions in developing countries from starvation. They say, “As anyone who has studied global hunger knows, there is enough food to feed the world. People starve because food is inequitably distributed. Wars and conflict are mostly to blame. World starvation will be solved through political solutions, not technical fixes. So, it is quite misleading to suggest that the problem can be overcome without radical political change.”
Doomed either way…
Trigger point?
This is not my area of expertise but somehow I don’t think we are going to solve the problem of war and corruption for a long time, if ever, though we may be able to do something about distribution and associated infrastructure.
The planet will contain an extra 3-4 billion people in the next 40-50 years. To feed them it seems we need to solve all or many of the issues presented by Cribb and the SA Food Network.
GM foods are definitely not going to feed the world, but leaving aside any real or perceived safety concerns, they may be a useful tool to be used in conjunction with the many other modern plant breeding tools and agronomic technologies and systems being investigated.
So the question is, as presented in the last blog post, will this possible predicted famine – or food security concern – be the trigger that makes GM technology acceptable? By that I don’t mean every GM food should automatically be accepted, but that it isn’t automatically rejected simply because it is GM.
Trust
The other interesting result from the New Scientist survey is that compared to the scientists from the rich countries those from developing countries perceive that the public have a much higher degree of trust of science.
It is arguably a lack of trust in the government regulators and scientific advice that has contributed to public concerns about GM foods in rich countries. Does that mean if poorer nations with a greater trust in science develop a GM crop to solve a local agronomic issue will have a greater acceptability?
Jason
TechNyou
Food vs. fuel. Growing grain for food wins
Using productive farmland to grow crops for food instead of fuel is more energy efficient, following analysis of 17 years of data
Eurekalert: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-04/msu-fvf041610.php
Reference
Journal: Environmental Science & Technology – in April 19 online issue
The coming famine: achieving global food security
Without doubling our research investment in R&D for agriculture and food production we face one of the greatest famines in history, says Julian Cribb in his latest book.
Link to Science Alert feature
Do more with less
By late this century, assuming predictions about population growth are even remotely accurate, we need to find a way of growing twice the amount of food on the same amount of land or less. And we need to do this in the environment of rapidly diminishing land, nutrients, oil, technology, skills and fish.
Not idle speculation
Cribb backs up these claims with good research, as he should as this is his area of journalistic expertise, with both a professional and personal interest in this area stretching back a couple of decades. And even if one extends the error margins of the statistical data he uses and we pick the least scary scenarios then it is still scary.
True to form, Cribb doesn’t pull punches. His solutions of which there are a few include the need to double global investment in agricultural science. He estimates we need to lift the total agrifood R&D spend to at least $80 billion, which is twice today’s investment. As a comparison Cribb suggests we spend about $1500 billion on weapons.
Lost in translation
His most important quote, however, I think, is the following: “Farmers, and the scientists who serve them, are today the most important human beings alive. The world has forgotten this.”
Too few people I meet seem to grasp the importance of science and technology, especially the emerging technologies such as nano and biotech, to helping solve this and many other societal issues. We willingly use technology, but many are blind to how it underpins the basic necessities of life – food, water, clothing, shelter. But I am a science communicator and come from a farming family, so I have a natural bias.
Stuck in our ways
Having said that, and Cribb alludes to this also, S&T alone will not solve this crisis. Any progress towards a solution will also require a massive cultural and behavioural change if we are to reduce our footprint on this earth. What we say we are happy to accept and what we actually do about it are all too often different things.
Julian Cribb’s book is The Coming Famine” and will be published by the University of California Press and CSIRO Publishing in August 2010.
Jason
TechNyou
Nanoparticles hits cancer target in human patients
Researchers have demonstrated the first proof that a nanoparticle can target, enter and deliver small chunks of RNA that can turn off the production of cancer protein.
NCI Alliance for nanotechnology in cancer (National Cancer Institute): Full media release here
April 2010
Reference
Nature 464, 1067-1070 (15 April 2010)
Davis, M, et al. Evidence of RNAi in humans from systemically administered siRNA via targeted nanoparticles
DNA transfer prevent human mitochondrial disease
We can prevent the transmission of mitochondrial DNA diseases from the mother to child, but it means that child will have DNA from three parents. Will we embrace this technology, or more importantly will the generation likely to use this technology embrace it.
Published in Nature this week, researchers have successfully transplanted the genetic material from the nucleus of a fertilised human egg into another fertilised egg, without carrying over mitochondria, the energy-producing structures of the cell that are found in the cytoplasm of the cell – the soupy stuff that all the cellular structures float around in.
Prevention better than cure?
Mitochondria have their own DNA, even if it is only a tiny amount relative to that in the nucleus. This technique, should it be perfected enough to reach a clinical application, might help prevent babies from inheriting diseases caused by mutations in the DNA of mitochondria. Mutations in mitochondrial DNA are linked to diseases causing neurological, muscle and heart problems, as well as deafness and type 2 diabetes. It is estimated that about one in 250 people carry a potentially disease-causing mitochondrial mutation, and the options for treatment are limited.
The problem is that the process requires the destruction of the embryo that loses its nuclear material. Doubtless this will cause concern among some. The same thing was done with monkeys in 2009, but they successfully transferred the nuclear material from unfertilised eggs. I am unsure if this can be done with humans, but it would certainly get around this particular issue
Not our future
Yesterday I ran a workshop on human enhancement for some South Australian science teachers. We discussed the ethical issues and acceptability or not of potential technologies that can assist in eliminating or preventing human diseases. They involved manipulating the human genome at the embryo stage. That is, making permanent changes that can be passed on to the next generation. A few thought some of the applications an abomination, but none exactly embraced the technology. The question arose that we are sitting here making judgements about what is acceptable for our society based on values that will likely be different to those that will actually be using such technology, should society, of course, decide that this is OK.
So although we need to have this discussion now to help guide the research objectives that in turn possibly prevent societal backlash and a flurry of reactive legislation thrown together to appease the unruly crowds (yes I am generalising a bit), are we making choices about stuff for a generation that may disagree with us?
Through the looking glass
It is a brave new world and we have only just opened the door to have a peek beyond the threshold. Some people tell me they the world is moving too fast and they want to get off; others say it they can’t make it go fast enough. Either way, it is fascinating stuff and the water cooler discussions can only get more interesting, at least around my water cooler.
More info
The Australian Science Media Centre has posted a report on this research with quotes from relevant experts.
Reference
Craven, L., et al. Nature advanced online publication, doi: 10.1038/nature08958 (2010).
Jason
TechNyou
Researchers find breast cancer survival gene
Australian researchers have found that a variant of a gene associated with skin pigmentation, hair and eye colour is linked to increased survival in breast cancer patients.
QLD Institute of Medical Research: http://www.qimr.edu.au/news/2010/survivegene.html
Reference
Journal of the National Cancer Institute and the paper is currently available online.
Nanoparticles and yeast boost plant growth
A fungus found in the deserts of north-western India interacts with nanoparticles to promote the growth of various crops and medicinal herbs.
Nanowerk news: http://www.nanowerk.com/news/newsid=15728.php