Daily Archives: March 15, 2022

DURHAM Durham quantum computing biotechnology startup Polarisqb has inked a collaboration agreement with Allosteric Bioscience, a newly formed company, to develop novel pharmaceuticals.

The companies announced the deal in a statement.

The purpose: Improving human aging and longevity.

Improved Aging, Longevity and Aging related diseases is a lead program at Allosteric Bioscience and the focus of this agreement, supported by an investment in Polarisqb, the statement reads.

The joint program will use quantum computing and artificial intelligence to create an inhibitor of a key protein involved in Aging that could have benefits for health representing a multibillion-dollar market, the companies said.

Quantum Computing technology is coming of age, allowing us to revolutionize drug discovery timelines, while improving the overall profile of the designed drugs, said Dr. Shahar Keinan, CEO of Polarisqb. The application of Quantum Computers to solving these complex questions is extraordinary.

Polarisqb raised funds in 2020, according to SEC filings.

Durham quantum-computing startup launches drug discovery platform it says is much faster

Durham startup with quantum-based drug platform raises more cash

Go here to see the original:
Durham quantum computing startup Polarisqb inks deal to ...

JMIR Res Protoc. 2022 Mar 14;11(3):e32352. doi: 10.2196/32352.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Previous research revealed several biological and environmental factors modulating cognitive functioning over a humans lifespan. However, the relationships and interactions between biological factors (eg, genetic polymorphisms, immunological parameters, metabolic products, or infectious diseases) and environmental factors (eg, lifestyle, physical activity, nutrition, and work type or stress at work) as well as their impact on cognitive functions across the lifespan are still poorly understood with respect to their complexity.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of the Dortmund Vital Study is to validate previous hypotheses as well as generate and validate new hypotheses about the relationships among aging, working conditions, genetic makeup, stress, metabolic functions, the cardiovascular system, the immune system, and mental performance over the human lifespan with a focus on healthy working adults. The Dortmund Vital Study is a multidisciplinary study involving the Departments of Ergonomics, Immunology, Psychology and Neurosciences, and Toxicology at the Leibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors at the Technical University of Dortmund (IfADo) in Germany, as well as several national and international partners.

METHODS: The Dortmund Vital Study is designed as a combined cross-sectional and longitudinal study. Approximately 600 healthy subjects aged between 20 and 70 years will participate. A wide range of demographic, psychological, behavioral, sensory, cardiovascular, immunological, and biochemical data, a comprehensive electroencephalography (EEG)-based cognitive test battery as well as structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have been included in the study.

RESULTS: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of IfADo in October 2015. The baseline testing was conducted between 2016 and 2021 and will be repeated every 5 years (3 follow-up measures until 2035). As of March 2020 (until the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic), 593 participants have been enrolled. Some results from the cross-sectional part of the study were already published, further results will be published soon. Longitudinal data will be analyzed and published by 2025.

CONCLUSIONS: We anticipate that the study will shed light on sources of interindividual differences in the alterations of cognitive functioning with increasing age and reveal biological and lifestyle markers contributing to work ability, longevity, and healthy aging on the one hand, and to risk factors for cognitive decline, mild cognitive impairment, or even dementia on the other hand.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05155397; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05155397.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/32352.

PMID:35285810 | DOI:10.2196/32352

Link:
Impact of Biological and Lifestyle Factors on Cognitive Aging and Work Ability in the Dortmund Vital Study: Protocol of an Interdisciplinary,...

Does strength training deserve a bit more credit for its role in long-term health? Evidence continues to point to the benefits of muscle-building exercise, and a new meta-analysis has concluded that people who do strength-training are less likely to die prematurely than those who dont even when they dont do any aerobic workouts.

Past research has similarly pointed to the long-term health benefits of strength training, but the new analysis, published February 28 in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, considered more recent data, up to June 2021.

The data suggests that 30 minutes to a full hour of weekly strength training was the amount linked with the most benefit in terms of longevity before the advantage plateaued (and with longer amounts of weekly strength training, it did actually start to decrease).

This provides a potential optimal dose of muscle-strengthening activities, says the lead study author,Haruki Momma, PhD, a lecturer in the department of medicine and science in sports and exercise at the Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine in Japan.

Current U.S. exercise guidelines recommend muscle-strengthening workouts twice a week but dont specify how long these workouts should be. Dr. Momma and others say the new data doesnt warrant a time-based recommendation for strength training to update to current physical activity guidelines, but its a step toward doing so.

For the study, Momma and colleagues examined data pooled from 16 earlier studies to get a clearer picture of how muscle-strengthening and aerobic exercise might influence longevity and the risk of death from several common health problems, including heart disease, diabetes, and cancer. Many of these smaller studies followed participants for several decades to see how physical activity influenced their life span. The studies ranged in size from about 3,800 to 478,000 participants ages 18 to 98.

Participants who did any type or amount of muscle-strengthening exercise had a 15 percent lower risk of premature death from all causes, the study found. Weight training was linked to a 10 to 17 percent lower chance of early death from diabetes, cancer, and cardiovascular disease.

But more weight training didnt necessarily lead to the biggest benefit. Researchers found that the most benefit a 10 to 20 percent reduction in the risk of early death from all causes and from cancer and heart disease specifically occurred when people did approximately 30 to 60 minutes of muscle-building workouts per week. After that first hour, there was a slight benefit for roughly one more hour per week. But beyond two hours, more weight training each week was actually associated with an increased chance of dying young.

Unsurprisingly, adding aerobic exercise to weekly strength training yielded the biggest longevity benefit. Compared with being inactive, doing both aerobic exercise and strength training on a weekly basis was associated with 40 percent lower odds of premature death from all causes, the study found. This combination of workouts was also linked to a 46 percent lower risk of death from cardiovascular disease and a 28 percent lower risk of cancer death.

There are some caveats to these findings. The study shows a link between these different types of exercise and mortality, but doesnt prove that one necessarily causes the other. Factors that werent controlled for in the studies could be at play. And, the analysis was based on self-reported exercise habits, rather than workouts objectively measured by fitness trackers or other gadgets, making it possible people misrepresented their physical activity levels.

The results from this new review largely align with other data on the question of how much strength training is linked with long-term health benefits. A study published in 2020 in the journal Preventing Chronic Disease, for example, examined longevity and exercise data for more than 72,000 adults. That study found a 10 to 12 percent lower risk of premature death from all causes with weight training up to two hours per week; no benefit was seen with more time.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Physical Activity Guidelines for Adults recommend muscle-strengthening exercises for all the major muscle groups at least twice per week (which could include lifting weights, using resistance bands, doing exercises like push-ups or sit-ups, or practicing some types of yoga). The guidelines also call for adults to get 150 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic exercise (like walking or biking) or 75 minutes of vigorous-intensity activity (like running or lap swimming) each week.

The new study adds to the evidence from earlier research suggesting there may be an optimal amount of weight training to do regardless of how much aerobic exercise people get.

But it would be premature to change the guidelines, says I-Min Lee, MD, ScD, a professor of epidemiology at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston who studies exercise and disease prevention.

I think it is too early to have time-based guidelines; we need more research, says Dr. Lee, who wasnt involved in the new analysis. But she adds that two 30-minute strength workouts per week would align with the current guidelines if youre targeting all the major muscle groups in those workouts.

Muscle-strengthening exercises lead to increased muscle mass and muscle strength, which help improve physical functioning, Lee says. Such exercises also improve glucose metabolism, enhance maintenance of healthy body weight, and help improve cardiovascular risk factors such as blood pressure. ... All these factors lead to lower risks of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and diabetes, which lowers mortality risk.

Read the original:
Strength Training Supports Longer Life, Maybe More Than Cardio - Everyday Health

life-style, life, wellness, Lymph & Longevity, the Untapped Secret to Health, Dr Gerald Lemole, lymphatic system

I never cease to be amazed at the rich inner life of the human body. Me too. I'm still freaked out that trillions of microorganisms inhabit my intestines. I'm wondering if I should RSVP for my entire microbiome next time I attend a party. True, but today the gut can step aside. We're talking about another internal system that's revealing itself to be just as crucial to our wellbeing. Sheesh. How many systems can one body hold? It's feeling crowded in here. Prepare to discover the lymphatic system - your "secret river" and star of a new book, Lymph & Longevity, the Untapped Secret to Health, by cardiothoracic surgeon Dr Gerald Lemole. He believes the lymphatic system is as important as your blood circulatory system, and we need to take much better care of it. What does this "secret river" do? It's a network of vessels carrying colourless lymphatic fluid throughout your body, delivering important messages to your brain and organs, and connecting to your lymph nodes, which trap and destroy all kinds of health-harming nasties. Lymph fluid also transports waste and toxins to your liver and kidneys, which in turn act as the body's bouncers, ejecting many undesirables. Wow. I'm home to an industrial canal network. Indeed. And if it's sluggish, the nasties can build up and cause inflammation and joint pain. Plus, your lymph system carries the immune cells that battle big baddies like cancer. You don't want to slow down those little battleships. So how do we free up our flow? Loving your lymph is fun! Relaxing in a sauna or hot bath improves circulation and widens vessels to promote good lymphatic flow. Monthly massages are a lymphatic lifeline. Delicious spices such as cayenne, cinnamon, oregano, basil and turmeric deliver compounds that relax your lymph vessels and improve overall flow. Bouncing on a trampoline also keeps that current strong, as does lots of water and sleep. And here's my favourite: singing or humming. What? The lymph system loves music? Dr Lemole says that when you hum, sing or chant, your lymph vessels dilate, allowing increased flow. He recommends that we hum throughout the day. Wow. Karaoke just became medicine. It's sing-along-a lymph time! Take me to the river and watch me flow.

/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/jess.wallace/31691088-6080-4224-9d69-67dcd53151e0.jpg/r3_153_2999_1846_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg

WELLNESS

March 12 2022 - 10:00AM

I never cease to be amazed at the rich inner life of the human body.

Me too. I'm still freaked out that trillions of microorganisms inhabit my intestines. I'm wondering if I should RSVP for my entire microbiome next time I attend a party.

True, but today the gut can step aside. We're talking about another internal system that's revealing itself to be just as crucial to our wellbeing.

Sheesh. How many systems can one body hold? It's feeling crowded in here.

Prepare to discover the lymphatic system - your "secret river" and star of a new book,Lymph & Longevity, the Untapped Secret to Health, by cardiothoracic surgeon Dr Gerald Lemole. He believes the lymphatic system is as important as your blood circulatory system, and we need to take much better care of it.

What does this "secret river" do?

It's a network of vessels carrying colourless lymphatic fluid throughout your body, delivering important messages to your brain and organs, and connecting to your lymph nodes, which trap and destroy all kinds of health-harming nasties.

Lymph fluid also transports waste and toxins to your liver and kidneys, which in turn act as the body's bouncers, ejecting many undesirables.

Wow. I'm home to an industrial canal network.

Indeed. And if it's sluggish, the nasties can build up and cause inflammation and joint pain. Plus, your lymph system carries the immune cells that battle big baddies like cancer. You don't want to slow down those little battleships.

So how do we free up our flow?

Loving your lymph is fun! Relaxing in a sauna or hot bath improves circulation and widens vessels to promote good lymphatic flow. Monthly massages are a lymphatic lifeline.

Delicious spices such as cayenne, cinnamon, oregano, basil and turmeric deliver compounds that relax your lymph vessels and improve overall flow. Bouncing on a trampoline also keeps that current strong, as does lots of water and sleep.

And here's my favourite: singing or humming.

What? The lymph system loves music?

Dr Lemole says that when you hum, sing or chant, your lymph vessels dilate, allowing increased flow. He recommends that we hum throughout the day.

Wow. Karaoke just became medicine. It's sing-along-a lymph time!

Take me to the river and watch me flow.

See the rest here:
How the lymphatic system is our 'secret river' of longevity - The Canberra Times

This is a full transcript of the seventh episode of the Quartz Obsession podcast season two on prosthetics. Heres a lightly edited transcript if you prefer.

Listen on:Apple Podcasts|Spotify|Google|Stitcher

Kira Bindrim: Every morning, before I start work, before I make my coffee, before I even get out of bed, I put on my prosthesis. Its not a metal leg, or robotic hand, but it is a device that restores the normal function of an underperforming body part.

My prosthetics are my glasses. And with these eyes, I cannot function without them.

When most people think of prosthetics, they think about artificial arms or feet, or maybe the carbon fiber legs used by Olympic runner Oscar Pistorius. But if we factor in any mechanical enhancement of human ability, prosthetics actually have a much richer history, and a much broader future. One of the earliest known examples was a big toe made out of wood and leather, dating back to 1,000 BC. One of the most recent examples, from 2016, is a brain implant that made it possible for a paralyzed man to move a robotic arm with his mind.

Already, there are hints of a future in which prosthetics enhance human abilities, rather than struggling to match them. But that future also invites a lot of questions, like: What does it mean to be a natural human? And when no one is one anymore, who gets left behind?

This is the Quartz Obsession, a podcast that explores the fascinating backstories behind everyday ideas, and what they tell us about the global economy. Im your host, Kira Bindrim. Today: prosthetics, the human upgrade.

I am joined now by Samanth Subramanian, who is based in London. Samanth is a senior reporter with Quartz who is focused on the future of capitalism, so I would argue he is very familiar with questions about how to upgrade humanity. But first, Samanth, I have to go back to something important that I just mentioned, because I know the listener is just dying to know more and I cannot leave them in suspense. What is the story with this prosthetic toe?

Samanth Subramanian: Well, I mean, one of the earliest things that have been described as a prosthetic was actually a fake eye. It was made of bitumen paste, so its kind of like tar, and covered in gold. And it was found in a tomb in ancient Iran, from around 3000 BC. But that isnt really a prosthetic, Id argue, because theres no functionality to it, you cant really see out of it. So the earliest true prosthetic we know was this wooden big toe that you spoke about. It dates to around 1000 BC, it was found attached to the right foot of a mummified Egyptian woman whod lost that big toe. And we dont know why she had it. One theory is that she had gangrene and it had to be amputated. But the big toe is so crucial to how we walk and maintain balance, that there was a need for a prosthetic and this must have been remarkably effective. So was essentially just tied on to the remainder of the foot. And she would have sort of walked on that until the day she died.

Kira Bindrim: I feel like Im just gonna look at my big toe differently every day for the rest of my life. But what I really take away from this is that there is evidence of humans using some form of prosthetic for at least 3000 years. This is going back millennia.

Samanth Subramanian: Yeah, I mean, its interesting to think about this continuity of human need, that our bodies are essentially frail, liable to break down, and that physical malfunctions happen and theyve been with us forever. But around the time of this big toe, around 1000 BC, we see the start, the rudiments of the human effort to overcome these malfunctions with things we can makewith prosthetics.

Kira Bindrim: Are there any other examples of, lets call them prosthetics of historical significance? Like prosthetics in history that we know of?

Samanth Subramanian: Yeah, I mean, from these older periods, artificial limbs are usually the most common. Herodotus, the Greek historian, had a story of a soldier who cut off his foot to escape his captors and who replaced it with a wooden foot. The Roman general Marcus Sergius had his right hand cut off in battle, so he had an iron prosthetic attached to his body in a way that it could hold a shield. I mean, its not just limbs, rightaround the 17th century, people started using ear trumpets to hear better if they were hard of hearing. You know, in the 13th century, you have eyeglasses, you know of the kind you wear every morning, of the kind of wearing now. But mostly, prosthetics were replacement for limbs. They were made to look like limbs, like a leg or an arm. And they had some kind of rough functionality. Think of Long John Silvers peg leg or Captain Hooks, well, hooktheyre kind of useful when theres no arm or leg there at all, but theyre very basic in the physicality of how they function.

Kira Bindrim:When did we start to see less basic prosthetics and prosthetics more like we see today? What started the next era of prosthetics?

Samanth Subramanian: Well, with the caveat that maybe any so-called start to an era is probably going to be entirely arbitrary, Im going to be bold and Im going to say that the age of prosthetic enhancement started on a lake in Arizona in the summer of 1976. And so that day, there was a guy named Van Phillips, he was a 21-year-old student at the University of Arizona at the time. And he was waterskiing when a really terrible accident happened: A passing motorboat cut off his left leg six inches below the knee. And he had to wear a clumsy prosthetic, which he described as a pink foot attached to an aluminum tube. But Phillips was so sort of discontent and dissatisfied with this, that he became a biomechanical engineer himself, and he started trying to design a better leg. And that was really the pivot, or the start of a new era. A couple of things happen in the 1980s, when Van Phillips and a few others are working in this field. So one is that materials start to get a lot more sophisticated. You know, the aerospace industry in particular had these refined carbon fiber composites. And they were making lighter and stronger materials out of carbon fiber. And Van Phillips came up with this idea that a prosthetic foot didnt have to look like a human foot. So instead, he looked to the shape of a cheetahs hind leg, to that curved sort of L-shape that you can see on the back of a cheetah. And so when the animal lands on the ground at 50 miles an hour, Phillips in one interview, that long tendon is being stretched like a catapult. Its the long tendinous fibers that propelled the animal forward. So this was really his big insight. The foot he designed, which he called the Flex-Foot, that was really the precursor to the kinds of prosthetics we see now, for example, in the Paralympics. Its the kind that Oscar Pistorius, the Blade Runner, wore. And the reason we can start to talk about it as enhancement rather than just replacement is because of how advanced these prosthetics have become. So theres a company called ssur in Iceland, which is also incidentally founded by a guy who lost part of his leg when he was young, theyve been around for 50 years now, they make so many of these prosthetics that you see at the Paralympicsthese running blades that are made out of really thin layers of carbon all sandwiched and compressed together. And they test it so thoroughly. I mean, the one statistic that I have for this podcast is that every running blade goes through 2 million cycles of tests, and each test is with a 300 kilogram weight on top of the blade. So its the equivalent of running a marathon a week for a year. Thats the kind of stringency and testing that you see now in the prosthetic field.

Kira Bindrim: I want to pause in the present for a second because I kind of want to bring in another idea, which is: Weve talked about the mechanical enhancement of human faculties, and weve talked about that getting to a place where were going into an enhancement versus just substituting. But then at the same time over the last, lets say, 50 years, we have technology encroaching on our lives in a certain way. And so Im thinking about my smartphone, Im thinking about my VR headset, or even my headphones that Im wearing right now. These are things that are also enhancing our ability to sort of exist in the world, or our human faculties in a way. Would you consider those, in our loose definitions here, prosthetics of a type?

Samanth Subramanian: I think so. I mean, you know, the notion of the prosthetic is that its with you all the time. And its enhancing your abilities, which is why actually, I would argue that our smartphones are prosthetics as well, in a way: Theyre with us every waking second, theyre basically extensions of our hands that are augmenting our mental capacities. There was a point back in 1998, when a couple of philosophers argue just this, the technologies that extend our minds become a part of us, in no different way than the old Egyptian wooden toe.

Kira Bindrim: Thinking about my smartphone as a prosthetic for my memory is so fascinating. Because Im thinking about, like, our ability to document everything in photos, our ability to look up anything at any time, like it is very much that.

Samanth Subramanian: Were sort of downloading our brains into the computer, so to speak, right? I mean, we dont remember phone numbers anymore, or birthdays. And these are things that people used to remember back in the day. And so whether you want to think of the mind as the storage drive of a computer, and you want to think about the mind freeing up space to do other things, thats really a kind of enhancement and augmentation as well. Now, scientists of the mind will tell you that the mind doesnt really work that way. You dont really free up space, you just kind of have different parts of the brain allocated for different things. But its definitely sort of a relief sometimes to not have to remember some of these other trivial details. The other kind of obvious related enhancement that we sort of flirted with as a species for a while was Google Glass, which is really the phone, but sort of up close and personal in your spectacles for people who dont need spectacles. And the idea was, again, a sort of visual and mental augmentation enhancement. It was a way to bring this kind of computerized enhancement to the everyday experience of seeing, but also to the everyday experience of recalling and remembering. And while in its time Google Glass was sort of derided, it really seems to be the obvious transition point for a computer to then sort of get even closer to us than it already is.

Kira Bindrim: After the break the future of prosthetics.

[ad break]

Kira Bindrim: Okay, so weve talked about historical prosthetics that were really focused on substitution for a body part or an ability. And weve talked about what we are loosely categorizing as enhancements. And weve talked a little bit about the simultaneous normalization of everyday improvements, like glasses, and hearing aids, and now our smartphones. So all of this stuff has come together. Now, what is the future of the prosthetic?

Samanth Subramanian: Well, the future of the prosthetic is really neural, I think. Its a way in which we can hook up our brains and nerves with our prosthetics to be able to control them with our thoughts, with our minds, the way we control our own limbs. And, of course, the most outlandish example of this right now thats imaginable, which is a computer inside the brain, is also the kind that Elon Musk is pursuing. Naturally, I mean, thats just what he does. So he set up a company called Neuralink, and he put $100 million into it. And just a few days ago, Kira, before you and I are speaking, he said that the Neuralink implant technology is very close to human trials. And obviously, scientists are really worried about this, about what it means for health and privacy, about what it means for this sort of technology becoming yet another consumer product. But there also seems to be a consensus right now from scientists that a full-fledged computer sitting in your brain, putting the equivalent of the internet at your mental command, at your mental fingertips, is a long way away.

Kira Bindrim: Paint me a picture of the the utopia Elon Musk is envisioning. Like, its very easy to imagine this not going well, right? Putting computers in our brains. So Im curious, if Im not thinking about the dystopian sci-fi that Im writing in my head, what is the good version of this? What would people be doing with their Neuralinks all day?

Samanth Subramanian: Well, what good Elon Musk wants to do in general is open to, you know, fair question and argument.

Kira Bindrim:Fair enough.

Samanth Subramanian: But with this one, I imagine he is so wedded to the culture of the computer. And he thinks that the internet and the computer and digital enhancements in general are so much of a good thing that it seems to him to be an automatic step to try to integrate that with the human brain itself. I think he sees the human brain as fallible, I think he sees it as frail, and I think he sees it at the same time as infinitely more creative if only it could process more, or if only it could have more information at its disposal. And so I would imagine the good that he wants to do is he wants to unlock some of this capacity that he sees in the human brain, and he wants to do it with the computer sitting in the brain. Whether that is actually feasible or realistic is another question altogether. And I think a lot of scientists have very severe doubts about this.

Kira Bindrim: How inevitable do you think some version of that future is? Like you just said, its pretty far off, it seems not anytime soon. But if we are moving towards a world where enhancement is more common, certainly how we interact with computers is more ubiquitous than ever, is it inevitable that in some way, we will all be more enhanced in the future?

Samanth Subramanian: Well, I mean, the Neuralink, as I said, is sort of fantasy at the moment. I think much closer are the kinds of enhancements that we call exoskeletons right now. These are sort of prosthetic frames that fit onto our limbs or our bodies that we can control with neural commands, possibly, and that gives us enhanced physical abilities. The two immediate uses that people are talking about for war and consumerism, which says a lot about our society, I guess. So soldiers are supposed to be able to use exoskeletons to become super soldiers and warehouse workers might end up using exoskeletons to lift heavier pallets and shipments. Then theres things like artificial organs, which we might be able to swap into our bodies when it feels like our kidneys or heart are failing, or even if they arent failing. I mean, these would be prosthetic enhancements as well. You know, so outside of the Neuralink sphere, theres a number of dominant players in this right. I mean, theres a company called Ekso Bionics, which is based in California, which does exoskeletons, and thats listed on NASDAQ. Theres a big company like Lockheed that is also experimenting with exoskeletons. There are small companies, startups like Jarvik Heart and Bivacor that talk about building artificial hearts. And surely, I mean, theres stuff going on in the Department of Defense that we dont know about. Theres a couple of companies in China, theres a couple of companies in Japan. Its worth saying at the moment that a lot of these companies, Musk aside, are still talking about using prosthetics to help the differently-abled or the infirm or the elderly. But there is a parallel future thats easy to envision here in the adoption of prosthetics by the able-bodied human.

Kira Bindrim: Do you think theres a risk that at some point, that second future overtakes the interests of the first? Like if the market for prosthetics is changing, will the types of prosthetics being developed change also? Could we see an ironic future where there isnt enough development of prosthetics for people who actually need them, versus could use them to enhance themselves?

Samanth Subramanian: Yeah, I mean, I think the problem is exemplified by Neuralink. I think one of the problems that people are talking about with this is they worry that the kind of funding and research attention that a Neuralink gets is actually distracting from a lot of other things that our differently-abled need. And some of that stuff can be really basicit can be city infrastructure for people who find it difficult to get around the city. But it can also be finding ways to just get basic prosthetics or even advanced prosthetics to people who need them. When I was talking to somebody at ssur, they made this point that was extremely insightful, which is that what they really want is to be able to give regular people who are differently abled a way to have an everyday leg and then a way to also have a sprinting or a running leg, the kind that athletes use. And they cant do that right now because insurance companies will not cover, you know, an athletic prosthetic, so to speak. But its important, its important for people to be able to want to run and to be able to exercise and, you know, these are the kinds of problems that are there in the here and now. And the drive to create prosthetic enhancements for able-bodied humans, Id argue, is actually sort of distracting from some of these other present problems that people already have.

Kira Bindrim: You know, often when we do these episodes, the big picture question can be kind of elusive, or thats the point, that were talking about something quite small, andsurprise!its about something much bigger. Here, it feels like the big-picture questions are right there. You know, were really talking about the future of humanity and theres a lot of potential inequity I could see here. If were moving towards a world where in some way everyone is enhanced, or considering the possibility of being enhanced, whatever that looks like, what do you see as the big-picture implications? What conversations do you think we will, in 50 years, be thinking, Oh, we should have had that conversation 50 years ago, we didnt anticipate that outcome?

Samanth Subramanian: Well, I think, you know, as is always the case with human society, I think we will wish that we had thought a little bit more about regulation and ethics, Im guessing. I mean, its the same with genetic engineering, in a way. These scientific changes may overtake us before we are ready for them from a systemic point of view. And at that point, well be forced to play catch up and to frame rules and codes for them, and well be presented with the prospect that the wealthy, who are already advantaged, will augment their privilege by buying these enhancements. And whether its some Neuralink or genetic improvement, you can imagine what that does to the inequities in society that already exist.

Kira Bindrim: Are there any other ethical considerations that youre starting to see, or could see emerging in the future?

Samanth Subramanian: I think the question of accesses is incredibly useful. I think, you know, what weve established here in this sort of long 3,000-year narrative of prosthetics is that its already gone, or is in the process of going from being something that helps people who are missing a human ability, to helping people who have all their faculties with them, but want to perform at some kind of super level, whether its for a competitive sport, or whether its for, you know, labor and society, or whether its for war. And I think the the danger here is that this will become yet another kind of consumer technology that you can just sort of buy off the shelf. And the minute that happens, theres all sorts of problems that creep in in terms of whos going to be designing prosthetics for the people who genuinely need them.

Kira Bindrim: So this is gonna come out as a sort of cynical question. When we first started talking, I really thought that what it means to be a natural human was sort of the central thrust, or like the most important question. And now Im wondering if its almost a red herring, that theres all these quite practical inequities or things that could go wrong that are easier to think about before our natural humanity. Do you think well care the same way, you know, we dont necessarily care that were attached to our smartphones all the time now? I dont know, just throwing that thought out.

Samanth Subramanian: Yeah. I mean, its a good question, because, I think in one sense, the idea of a natural human is not a useful one. I mean, we stopped being natural humans when we discovered agriculture, you could argue, when we started being able to control nature. And suddenly, we are not natural humans now, given how we can correct our vision, cure our diseases, ward of cancer for a while, extend our longevity. But certainly we arent integrated physically into machines yet, into computers, that is. I think maybe that might be a watershed moment, when computers move from outside the human body to some kind of integration with the body, whether its through electrodes or microprocessors in our brain that can control bionic limbs, or whether its through a Neuralink implant. You know, when that happens, that will really put a gulf between the humans who came before and the humans who came after.

Kira Bindrim: Okay, weve been talking about a lot of heavy potential applications. So I want to give you a final question that is a lighter one, which is I just want to hear a fun fact of a prosthetics. Something that youve discovered in the course of your research that is just so fascinating, other than the toe, that you cannot stop thinking about it.

Samanth Subramanian: Oh, my favorite example is not strictly a prosthetic because it isnt functional, but its so intriguing I have to mention it. So there was a really famous 16th century Danish astronomer called Tycho Brahe. And when he was young and drunk, he lost a part of his nose in a duel. And so he had a false nose made of brass, which he painted in flesh tones and he attached to his face, to the nasal cavity, with putty. And he had to sort of carry this putty around in a little pot with him everywhere because it was liable to come unstuck and then you have to sort of paste it back on. And when he died, the nose was supposedly buried with him. Recently, they found his grave and they kind of looked in his coffin, and there was no nose. No trace of Tycho Brahes famous nose. And so the question of what happened to it and where it went is, is its the ultimate missing prosthetic mystery.

Kira Bindrim: Yeah, the curious case of the missing brass nose. Its on someones desk somewhere as a paperweight, I guarantee you.

Samanth Subramanian: Or its on somebodys face, you know, painted in flesh tones and attached with putty. You never know.

Kira Bindrim: I really want to believe I would be able to identify a brass nose. But

Samanth Subramanian: Its so great. I mean, theres paintings of Tycho Brahe, obviously, from his time, and theyve been carefully painted to make it seem as if his nose is real. And so, you know, theres the question of sort of why he cared so much about the fact that he was missing a part of his nose is you know, its a really sort of nice insight into this towering 16th century intellectual.

Kira Bindrim: At the time youre getting all these paintings made of yourself, you really just want to look your best. Thank you, Samanth, this was fascinating.

Samanth Subramanian: Thank you so much. So glad to be here.

Kira Bindrim: Thats our Obsession for the week. This episode was produced by Katie Jane Fernelius. Our sound engineer is George Drake and our executive producer is Alex Ossola. The theme music is by Taka Yasuzawa and Alex Suguira. Special thanks to Samanth Subramanian in London.

If you liked what you heard, please leave a review on Apple Podcasts or wherever youre listening. Tell your friends about us! Use that smartphone you cant put down to send them the link. Then head to qz.com/obsession to sign up for Quartzs Weekly Obsession email and browse hundreds of interesting backstories.

See the article here:
Prosthetics of the future are focused on boosting the able-bodied - Quartz

From our long lives to our social skills and even language, zoologist Antone Martinho-Truswell argues that we are more like birds than we think

By Simon Ings

EVOLUTION has created a living world of jaw-dropping diversity. It has also generated what seem like astonishing coincidences. The pangolins of Africa and armadillos of South America, for instance, look like close cousins. In fact, each is more closely related to humans than to each other. Their similarity arises because they independently evolved near-identical strategies to cope with the same kind of environmental challenges.

This is just one example of what is known as convergent evolution, but there are many others, and not all of them are so easy to spot. Take humans and birds: few readers will be immediately won over by Sydney-based zoologist Antone Martinho-Truswells claims that we are like a strangely featherless bird, and that we have more in common with birds than with our mammalian cousins.

By the time I finished The Parrot in the Mirror, though, I found that idea both compelling and reasonable. Martinho-Truswell explores the traits shared by humans and birds, from our unusual longevity to our advanced social skills, from our parenting styles to our intelligence and even the use of language. These, he argues, are all examples of convergent evolution.

Briefly, his argument goes like this: once birds could fly, they could elude almost all predators. Since they were now less likely to be eaten in any given year, they could live longer and produce more offspring. With longevity came the opportunity and the need to develop increased intelligence. It is an advantage for long-living animals to be smart because it helps them to survive long enough to raise their young to adulthood. Whats more, because longer development requires a bigger egg and a bigger yolk sac, and because an egg can only get so big if its mother is to fly, most birds hatch out very immature, helpless young. Chicks require enormous amounts of care, often provided by pair-bonded parents, and sometimes supplemented by a larger community. This favours the evolution of complex social behaviour and communication.

Martinho-Truswell argues that the human evolutionary story is a warped mirror image of this. Our story begins, not with flight, but with communal behaviour among primates, which promoted the evolution of intelligence and social behaviour. This reduced the likelihood of predation, and longevity followed, boosting intelligence to the point where big-brained human young have to be born immature and helpless so as not to endanger their mothers lives during childbirth.

So, the argument goes, humans and birds evolved measurable intelligence in response to similar challenges. But how do we compare our abilities?

In this regard, Martinho-Truswell does well to strike a balance between precision and imagination. On the one hand, a ducklings ability to identify its mother shortly after the moment of its birth puts it well ahead of chimpanzees, parrots, pigeons, crows and even human children. But this one hardwired ability doesnt necessarily make the duckling more intelligent.

Humans and birds evolved intelligence in response to similar challenges. But how do we compare abilities?

On the other hand, it would be a dull observer indeed that didnt see quite staggering evidence of advanced cognition in Irene Pepperbergs 30-year study of language use in Alex, an African grey parrot. The bird not only answered questions, he asked them, too. And he got annoyed if people gave him silly answers.

Containing the complexities of convergent evolution in a straightforward narrative isnt easy. Evolutionary causes and effects dont follow each other in neat, storybook fashion, and there is always the temptation, reading this book, to take Martinho-Truswells acts of narrative shorthand at face value and suppose that humans, 50 million years behind parrots in the evolution of intelligence, somehow became more human by actually mimicking their distant avian cousins.

Clearly that isnt the case. But perhaps it is better to be slightly misled by a gripping story than to be bludgeoned by a dull one. Martinho-Truswell has written a superb introduction to a surprisingly complex field of study. Having read it, you wont look at yourself in the mirror in quite the same way.

More on these topics:

See the original post:
The Parrot in the Mirror review: Why humans evolved to be like birds - New Scientist

Many women are born with or grow facial hair. Most will agree, when facial hair goes rogue, its unnerving and often unappealing. So why do women grow rogue facial hair, and what can be done about this? Renewal Institute director Dr. Maureen Allem answers Longevitys Q&A.

Rogue facial hair is a condition called hirsutism. This means excessive hair appears in a male pattern on womens bodies. Some medical conditions can cause moderate or severe hirsutism, the most likely being polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). PCOS causes irregular periods and hormone imbalancesthat result in abnormal hair growth, as well as hair loss at the front of the head.

There are other causes too, such as idiopathic hyperandrogenemia, a condition where women have excessive levels of male hormones. These hormones, called androgens, are made in the hair follicles or are sent out from the ovaries or adrenal glands.

Further causes are congenital adrenal hyperplasia, an inherited condition that is triggered when the adrenal glands make abnormal amounts of steroid hormones, such as androgen and cortisol, as well as hypo- or hyperthyroidism.

However, many women who dont have hirsutism, or any medical condition whatsoever, consider their hair growth excessive. And, as we age, the quality, thickness and density of our hair growth deteriorate, especially as our hormone levels fluctuate and lessen over time.

Photo by nappy from Pexels

While there arent different types of hair, there are different categories of hair that may appear on a human body in various areas and at different stages of life.

Youll find tiny, thin, and translucent hair on your cheeks, your forehead, your nose, and even your earlobes. This is called vellus hair. Itll begin developing during childhood and, as you get older, itll mature and can be replaced by thick, dark hair.

Notice random course hairs on areas such as your chin? These little irritants are down to genetics and, no, plucking them out with tweezers wont make them grow back thicker or in multiples.

Its certainly something to pay attention to. It could be a warning sign that something is wrong.

Botanicals such as saw palmetto, beta-sitosterol, and nettle help to reduce DHT, the hormone that causes abnormal hair growth and acne. Some of the compounds in cruciferous vegetables are beneficial, so upping your cruciferous vegetable intake, from a food-based perspective, is helpful.

What is the best long-term method of treating facial hair?

Facial hair is traditionally very difficult to treat, as its hormone-dependent. Some laser hair-removal systems use infrared light to target the germ cell in the hair follicle. Data has shown that about 30-90% of the hair doesnt grow back after the end of the treatment cycle. The success of these laser treatments depends on the initial heat of the laser treatment. No pain, no gain.

We cant guarantee 100% permanent hair removal. Occasional maintenance or touch-up treatments will be required. Laser treatment requires the hair to have a colour, as its the colour (or chromophore) that the laser targets in order to destroy the hair follicle. Therefore, white and light hairs are the most difficult to remove. Light hairs may require more treatments and more maintenance, and more modest results should be expected. Grey hair cant be treated with laser.

When done correctly, plucking removes the entire hair from the follicle, keeping it from growing back for up to six weeks.

No hair-removal treatment can get rid of hair permanently. There are a variety of ways to get rid of hair for weeks, months, or longer periods of time. The best remedy for unwanted facial hair would be to address the critical systems mentioned below.

There are five critical systems that you need to focus on to ensure optimum hormone production and balance:

Insulin resistance affects hormones in several ways. Insulin surges can up-regulate an enzyme called 17,20-lyase, which increases the production of testosterone and leads to PCOS. However, not only do testosterone levels go up with insulin resistance in women but estrogen levels can too, because 17,20-lyase converts DHEA, which is an adrenal hormone, into the estrogen-testosterone pathway. Taking steps to address blood sugar dysregulation, such as eating healthy food, avoiding flour, sugar, and industrial seed oils, and adjusting your carbohydrate intake based on your blood-sugar response, can help.

Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis This is also referred to as adrenal fatigue syndrome. You need to manage stress, make sure youre getting enough sleep, engage in regular stress management, and address any gut issues or any other chronic health issues that may cause a stress response in the body.

Gut Inflammation caused by dysbiosis or leaky gut suppresses the function of the hypothalamus and the pituitary in the brain, which produce the stimulating hormones, and also suppresses the function of the adrenals and the ovaries that produce the actual hormones.Dysbiosis also increases the production of certain downstream estrogen metabolites such as 4-OH and 16-OH, which are proliferative, meaning they can contribute to breast and prostate cancer, and decreases the production of 2-OH, which is protective against those conditions.

SizeSquares/Shutterstock

Detoxification eating a healthy diet, following an estrogen detox diet, and adding supplements such as a good probiotic and glutathione will be beneficial.

If you dont have enough omega-3, and you have too much omega-6, it can drive the production of prostaglandins and lead to an inflammatory environment. However, sufficient amounts of omega-3 from cold-water fatty fish or taking fish oil, EPA, and DHA, promote the conversion of the prostaglandins into less inflammatory substances or pathways.

Self-acceptance is perhaps the best gift you can give yourself.

Self-acceptance without condition means that you accept yourself as you are, flaws and all. Look after yourself, eat well, exercise, sleep well and meditate. Focus on being happy.

Main photo credit: Photo by Icons8 Team on Unsplash

Dr. Maureen Allem, the founder and Medical Director of the Renewal Institute, consults at the Parkhurst, Morningside, Fourways, and Waterfall branches in Gauteng and the Cape Quarter, Constantia, and Claremont branches in the Western Cape. She is a general practitioner with a special interest in aesthetic and integrative/anti-aging medicine and procedures. She also trains all the new doctors and oversees each branch by rotationally traveling between them. Her full biography is listed below.

Read more:
Why Women Grow Rogue Facial Hair and What To Do - Longevity LIVE - Longevity LIVE

The later episodes of The Umbrella Academy Season 2 made an unsettling revelation about Reginald Hargreeves - already one of the most enigmatic characters in the show. The mysterious old man was always very quirky, and his cold, ruthless treatment of his children suggested that something wasn't quite right - but it took almost 2 seasons for viewers to find out he is not entirely human. So, is Reginald Hargreeves really an alien?

Reginald Hargreeves is the emotionally abusive adoptive father of the seven main characters in The Umbrella Academy. The eccentric billionaire, entrepreneur, and researcher, soon establishes himself as the last person one would expect to adopt seven children; he never acts fatherly towards them and his cold treatment is largely responsible for the main characters' stunted emotional growth and toxic traits.

Reginald Hargreeves dies very early in the first season, and he's only seen through flashbacks until his children get trapped in the 60s and meet him again. Despite that, he is one of the most significant characters plot-wise and the events of Season 1 would never have kicked off if he had not died mysteriously.

It can be argued that Reginald Hargrees very much pulls the strings of the plot through his absence, as the Umbrella Academy members are forced to reunite and co-exist after a very long time to investigate his demise. And this is not even where it all started. As the story goes on, we find out that the reason behind his adoption of seven magically gifted children was his wish to save the world.

At this point, it's still unclear what exactly he wanted to save the world from - especially given that one of these children, Vanya, almost brought the apocalypse twice, and Reginald's neglect and abuse played a major part in that. So, could the threat Reginald trained his children for be out of this world?

Related: Is The Umbrella Academy Season 3 Coming to Netflix on March 2022?

As Season 2 and the comic confirms, Reginald Hargreeves is, in fact, an alien who masquerades as a human. Quirky as he may be, he didn't give any major clues of not being human until later in Season 2, where he removes his mask to get rid of some of his enemies.

His status as an alien expresses his extreme longevity, given that he hasn't aged at all since the early 20th century, and, when seen in the 60s, he's still identical to the father the Umbrella Academy members knew. So, why is an alien posing as a human, and why is he trying so hard to save the world he doesn't seem to care about much? Hopefully, The Umbrella Academy Season 3 will provide some answers!

See the rest here:
Is Reginald Hargreeves an Alien in The Umbrella Academy? - EpicStream