they're in my skin and my bones

Posts Tagged "science"

Why helping the poor will save the world, by my hero Hans Rosling.

The talk is called “Religions and Babies” and you are in for a surprise.

This man is such a genius.
Posted 5/27/12 @ 10:10 PM #
mohandasgandhi: wildunicornherd: thinksquad: Here is a Science fair project presented by a girl in a secondary school in Sussex . In it she took filtered water and divided it into two parts. The first part she heated to boiling in a pan on the stove, and the second part she heated to boiling in a microwave. Then after cooling she used the water to water two identical plants to see if there would be any difference in the growth between the normal boiled water and the water boiled in a microwave. She was thinking that the structure or energy of the water may be compromised by microwave. As it turned out, even she was amazed at the difference, after the experiment which was repeated by her class mates a number of times and had the same result. It has been known for some years that the problem with microwaved anything is not the radiation people used to worry about, it’s how it corrupts the DNA in the food so the body can not recognize it. Microwaves don’t work different ways on different substances. Whatever you put into the microwave suffers the same destructive process. Microwaves agitate the molecules to move faster and faster. This movement causes friction which denatures the original make-up of the substance. It results in destroyed vitamins, minerals, proteins and generates the new stuff called radiolytic compounds, things that are not found in nature. So the body wraps it in fat cells to protect itself from the dead food or it eliminates it fast. Think of all the Mothers heating up milk in these ‘Safe’ appliances. What about the nurse in Canada that warmed up blood for a transfusion patient and accidentally killed him when the blood went in dead. But the makers say it’s safe. But proof is in the pictures of living plants dying! NO, YOU PIG-IGNORANT ASSWIPES. SOME KID’S CLASS PROJECT IS NOT REAL SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH. YOU’VE HEARD OF “DOUBLE BLIND”, RIGHT? CALL ME WHEN IT’S PUBLISHED IN NATURE. the structure or energy of the water what the fuck does that even mean you realize that a water molecule is made up of three fucking atoms and if you rearrange it it isn’t water anymore and you would fucking notice the problem with microwaved anything is not the radiation people used to worry about Here is a handy diagram I drew of all the different types of radiation: Microwaves != nuclear reactors, so calm your tits. it’s how it corrupts the DNA in the food so the body can not recognize it …do you understand what DNA is and how eating works? DNA is a jumble of protein nucleic acid in the middle of each cell and it tells the cells in that particular organism how to make more cells. Your body does not care about whether your food has any DNA in it or not. The chemicals it cares about are things like vitamins and sugars, as well as inorganic shit like salt. (You can denature DNA by heating it or using chemicals like urea. It is like what happens when you fry an egg, which is basically a big glob of protein—the strands break apart and it looks like tiny white strings. Very cool.) Microwaves agitate the molecules to move faster and faster. I…just…that is the fucking definition of heat, whether you’re heating something over a flame or in a microwave or using the Sun. The difference is that microwaves mostly affect the water molecules in your food and they don’t need to use as much heat. Water boils at 100°C, which is just about as hot as water can get before it just turns into steam; but that’s like the lowest setting on your oven. Oven- or stove-cooked food tastes different partly because it uses higher temperatures and partly because heat is transferred in a different way. This movement causes friction That’s not what friction is. It results in destroyed vitamins, minerals, proteins and generates the new stuff called radiolytic compounds, things that are not found in nature. Let’s take these one at a time. Vitamins are classified as water-soluble or fat-soluble. So cooking things in water will dissolve the water-soluble vitamins (C and all the B’s). Just plain heat doesn’t do that, so microwaving veggies—which keeps the water in—is actually a healthier option. Proteins: Breaking the chemical bonds in proteins (denaturing) is a part of any cooking. However, denatured protein is still nutritious—that’s why you can meet your protein intake with foods like fried eggs and baked chicken. Minerals are just chemical elements, like off the periodic table—sodium, iron, potassium. (Vitamins and proteins are very complex combinations of elements.) Which brings me to the “radiolytic compound” bullshit. When you talk about breaking apart, say, iron—you’re talking about breaking down the iron atoms themselves. Which is a whole lot different than breaking the bonds between atoms. It takes hella radiation. You need shit like gamma rays—the OOOH SCARY NUCULAR radiation—which we’ve already established do not come from your microwave. things that are not found in nature What the shit does that even mean? You all know radioactive elements occur in nature, right? In rocks and also in living cells. That’s right, you have this radioactive kind of carbon INSIDE YOU. You get it by eating those delicious plants. We can tell how long ago something died by how much of it is left. Tons of shit that occurs naturally is horribly bad for you. And tons of shit that never existed until we cooked it up is great for you—like the chemical compounds in a lot of medications. PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE THIS SHIT ARE WHY CHILDHOOD DISEASES THAT CAUSED SERIOUS ILLNESSES AND/OR DEATH THAT WE NEARLY ERADICATED WITH VACCINES ARE NOW COMING BACK AND WHY CONSPIRACY THEORIST TWATS ARE ASKING CITY COUNCIL NOT TO FLUORIDATE THE WATER AND WHY GLOBAL WARMING WILL WRECK OUR FUCKING PLANET. LERN 2 SCIENCE. Think before you reblog. And microwave your veggies. Science is emotional. Brilliant.

mohandasgandhi:

wildunicornherd:

thinksquad:

Here is a Science fair project presented by a girl in a secondary school in Sussex . In it she took filtered water and divided it into two parts. The first part she heated to boiling in a pan on the stove, and the second part she heated to boiling in a microwave. Then after cooling she used the water to water two identical plants to see if there would be any difference in the growth between the normal boiled water and the water boiled in a microwave. She was thinking that the structure or energy of the water may be compromised by microwave. As it turned out, even she was amazed at the difference, after the experiment which was repeated by her class mates a number of times and had the same result.

It has been known for some years that the problem with microwaved anything is not the radiation people used to worry about, it’s how it corrupts the DNA in the food so the body can not recognize it.

Microwaves don’t work different ways on different substances. Whatever you put into the microwave suffers the same destructive process. Microwaves agitate the molecules to move faster and faster. This movement causes friction which denatures the original make-up of the substance. It results in destroyed vitamins, minerals, proteins and generates the new stuff called radiolytic compounds, things that are not found in nature.

So the body wraps it in fat cells to protect itself from the dead food or it eliminates it fast. Think of all the Mothers heating up milk in these ‘Safe’ appliances. What about the nurse in Canada that warmed up blood for a transfusion patient and accidentally killed him when the blood went in dead. But the makers say it’s safe. But proof is in the pictures of living plants dying!

NO, YOU PIG-IGNORANT ASSWIPES.

SOME KID’S CLASS PROJECT IS NOT REAL SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH. YOU’VE HEARD OF “DOUBLE BLIND”, RIGHT? CALL ME WHEN IT’S PUBLISHED IN NATURE.

the structure or energy of the water

what the fuck does that even mean you realize that a water molecule is made up of three fucking atoms and if you rearrange it it isn’t water anymore and you would fucking notice

the problem with microwaved anything is not the radiation people used to worry about

Here is a handy diagram I drew of all the different types of radiation:

The Electromagnetic Spectrum Cheat Sheet

Microwaves != nuclear reactors, so calm your tits.

it’s how it corrupts the DNA in the food so the body can not recognize it

…do you understand what DNA is and how eating works? DNA is a jumble of protein nucleic acid in the middle of each cell and it tells the cells in that particular organism how to make more cells. Your body does not care about whether your food has any DNA in it or not. The chemicals it cares about are things like vitamins and sugars, as well as inorganic shit like salt.

(You can denature DNA by heating it or using chemicals like urea. It is like what happens when you fry an egg, which is basically a big glob of protein—the strands break apart and it looks like tiny white strings. Very cool.)

Microwaves agitate the molecules to move faster and faster.

I…just…that is the fucking definition of heat, whether you’re heating something over a flame or in a microwave or using the Sun. The difference is that microwaves mostly affect the water molecules in your food and they don’t need to use as much heat. Water boils at 100°C, which is just about as hot as water can get before it just turns into steam; but that’s like the lowest setting on your oven. Oven- or stove-cooked food tastes different partly because it uses higher temperatures and partly because heat is transferred in a different way.

This movement causes friction

That’s not what friction is.

It results in destroyed vitamins, minerals, proteins and generates the new stuff called radiolytic compounds, things that are not found in nature.

Let’s take these one at a time.

  • Vitamins are classified as water-soluble or fat-soluble. So cooking things in water will dissolve the water-soluble vitamins (C and all the B’s). Just plain heat doesn’t do that, so microwaving veggies—which keeps the water in—is actually a healthier option.
  • Proteins: Breaking the chemical bonds in proteins (denaturing) is a part of any cooking. However, denatured protein is still nutritious—that’s why you can meet your protein intake with foods like fried eggs and baked chicken.
  • Minerals are just chemical elements, like off the periodic table—sodium, iron, potassium. (Vitamins and proteins are very complex combinations of elements.)

Which brings me to the “radiolytic compound” bullshit. When you talk about breaking apart, say, iron—you’re talking about breaking down the iron atoms themselves. Which is a whole lot different than breaking the bonds between atoms. It takes hella radiation. You need shit like gamma rays—the OOOH SCARY NUCULAR radiation—which we’ve already established do not come from your microwave.

things that are not found in nature

What the shit does that even mean? You all know radioactive elements occur in nature, right? In rocks and also in living cells. That’s right, you have this radioactive kind of carbon INSIDE YOU. You get it by eating those delicious plants. We can tell how long ago something died by how much of it is left.

Tons of shit that occurs naturally is horribly bad for you. And tons of shit that never existed until we cooked it up is great for you—like the chemical compounds in a lot of medications.

PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE THIS SHIT ARE WHY CHILDHOOD DISEASES THAT CAUSED SERIOUS ILLNESSES AND/OR DEATH THAT WE NEARLY ERADICATED WITH VACCINES ARE NOW COMING BACK AND WHY CONSPIRACY THEORIST TWATS ARE ASKING CITY COUNCIL NOT TO FLUORIDATE THE WATER AND WHY GLOBAL WARMING WILL WRECK OUR FUCKING PLANET.

LERN 2 SCIENCE. Think before you reblog. And microwave your veggies.

Science is emotional. Brilliant.

 Source: thinksquad
fuckyeahneuroscience: THE FRACTAL SOLUTION TO THE UNIVERSE: In his second year of neuroscience grad school, Greg Dunn was moonlighting with a different kind of experiment: blowing ink across pieces of paper. The neuron-like pattern it formed was instantly recognizable to him as a neuroscientist. “Ink spreads because it wants to go in the direction of less resistance, and that’s probably also the case of when branches grow or neurons grow,” he says. “The reason the technique works really well is because it’s directly related to how neurons are actually behaving.” Dunn calls this the “fractal solution to the universe,” which he sees as the “fundamental beauty of nature.” He’s fascinated that this branching pattern holds true across orders of magnitude, whether that’s nanometers for neurons, centimeters for ink, or meters for a tree branch. Since graduating with his PhD last fall, Dunn has continued to spend his days with neurons—big, golden ones ten thousand times the size of neurons in your brain. The former University of Pennsylvania grad student now creates paintings of neurons for a living. (via Ink Wants to Form Neurons, and an Artful Scientist Obliges | Mind & Brain | DISCOVER Magazine, submitted by flamshiz, thanks!)

fuckyeahneuroscience:

THE FRACTAL SOLUTION TO THE UNIVERSE: In his second year of neuroscience grad school, Greg Dunn was moonlighting with a different kind of experiment: blowing ink across pieces of paper. The neuron-like pattern it formed was instantly recognizable to him as a neuroscientist. “Ink spreads because it wants to go in the direction of less resistance, and that’s probably also the case of when branches grow or neurons grow,” he says. “The reason the technique works really well is because it’s directly related to how neurons are actually behaving.”

Dunn calls this the “fractal solution to the universe,” which he sees as the “fundamental beauty of nature.” He’s fascinated that this branching pattern holds true across orders of magnitude, whether that’s nanometers for neurons, centimeters for ink, or meters for a tree branch.

Since graduating with his PhD last fall, Dunn has continued to spend his days with neurons—big, golden ones ten thousand times the size of neurons in your brain. The former University of Pennsylvania grad student now creates paintings of neurons for a living.

(via Ink Wants to Form Neurons, and an Artful Scientist Obliges | Mind & Brain | DISCOVER Magazine, submitted by flamshiz, thanks!)

 Source: fuckyeahneuroscience
What we call “colour blind” is actually an earlier form of vision. Humans and other primates have a mutation that gives us trichromacy, or the ability to see 3 colours - red, blue, and green. There are three proteins: SWS (blue, at 417 nm), MWS (green, at 530 nm), and LWS (red, at 560 nm). Each picks up a different wavelength of light. Other species only have the first two, blue and green. Some even only have blue, such as creatures that live near the bottom of the ocean where light cannot penetrate, and others have a fourth, one that detects ultraviolet. At some point during vertebrate evolution, the MWS gene duplicated and mutated, producing the LWS protein. These two genes are 98% identical, but different enough that lineages with this mutation (humans, many primates, etc) perceive red. The evolutionary benefit of this was likely that red-leaved plants offered better nutrition than green-leaved plants. This would have created selective pressure for individuals with trichromacy.

What we call “colour blind” is actually an earlier form of vision. Humans and other primates have a mutation that gives us trichromacy, or the ability to see 3 colours - red, blue, and green. There are three proteins: SWS (blue, at 417 nm), MWS (green, at 530 nm), and LWS (red, at 560 nm). Each picks up a different wavelength of light. Other species only have the first two, blue and green. Some even only have blue, such as creatures that live near the bottom of the ocean where light cannot penetrate, and others have a fourth, one that detects ultraviolet.

At some point during vertebrate evolution, the MWS gene duplicated and mutated, producing the LWS protein. These two genes are 98% identical, but different enough that lineages with this mutation (humans, many primates, etc) perceive red.

The evolutionary benefit of this was likely that red-leaved plants offered better nutrition than green-leaved plants. This would have created selective pressure for individuals with trichromacy.

 Source: just-cat-facts
The Reverse Map of the World - If land masses dominated instead of water Today I learned that ~50 million years ago, South America and Antarctica were a continuous land mass. When they separated ~16 million years later, the ocean temperature around Antarctica went from about 20°C to -1°C. A species of fish, or rather 16 similar species of this fish called the icefish, had to adapt to this drop in temperature. How? By evolving clear blood. They’re the only known vertebrates to not have red blood. Without red blood cells, their blood is less viscous and easier to pump in such cold temperatures. They absorb dissolved oxygen instead.

The Reverse Map of the World - If land masses dominated instead of water

Today I learned that ~50 million years ago, South America and Antarctica were a continuous land mass. When they separated ~16 million years later, the ocean temperature around Antarctica went from about 20°C to -1°C. A species of fish, or rather 16 similar species of this fish called the icefish, had to adapt to this drop in temperature. How? By evolving clear blood. They’re the only known vertebrates to not have red blood.

Without red blood cells, their blood is less viscous and easier to pump in such cold temperatures. They absorb dissolved oxygen instead.

(via madeuca)

 Source: theamericankid

People who defend smoking cigarettes. »

I don’t get it.

The following is the dumbest logic I’ve ever seen. If your lungs are in working order, the tar and other chemicals isn’t going to automatically just sit there and accumulate because that’s not what bodies are designed to do. It will take years of damage to make your body less efficient at processing the chemicals, and at a different rate for each person. So there is no way to say “it takes only 3 years to suffocate from tar in the lungs” because there are a lot of messed up assumptions in that.

But then again, I’m just in first year Biology. What do I really know. (Not a lot, but some stuff.)

In the United Kingdom, full strength cigarettes contain 10mg of ‘tar’, and in America they contain 20mg of ‘tar’.  For arguments’ sake, we will use the American levels as this would accumulate faster. The lung capacity of an average adult human is about six litres, which is 6,000 cubic centimetres. At room temperature, one cubic centimetre (one ml) of water weighs about one gram. Tar however, being an oily substance, floats on water, so one ml weighs less than a gram. The exact density of tar depends on its composition. Tar is usually a mixture of many different oily chemicals. At its densest though, one gram of tar occupies about 1.25 ml of volume.  At 20 mg (0.025 ml) of “tar” per cigarette, it would take at least 50 cigarettes to yield one gram of “tar”. That’s two and a half packs of cigarettes. This means that, if you smoke one pack of full flavour cigarettes, you would have about 0.5 ml of “tar” in your lungs. Because your lungs hold about 6,000 ml of air, you would have to smoke about 12,000 packs of cigarettes to completely fill them with “tar”. Smoking one pack per day, that would take about 33 years. This means that anyone who started smoking at age 15 would have nothing but a thick slurry of tar oozing out of their nose and mouth by age 48. There would be no air left in his or her lungs at all, just “tar”. This however, is not the end of the story. Obviously, if your lungs were completely filled with tar, then you would suffocate and die. Your lungs do not have to be completely filled to result in suffocation; about a cup (500 ml) will do. That’s only about 1,000 packs of full flavoured cigarettes. You could do that in just under three years at a pack a day. If the popular myths about cigarette “tar” were true, then every pack-a-day smoker would be dead, from suffocation, before the end of three years.

Is GPS All in Our Heads? | NYTimes.com »

IT’S a question that probably every driver with a Garmin navigation device on her dashboard has asked herself at least once: What did we ever do before GPS? How did people find their way around, especially in places they’d never been before?

Like most questions asked in our tech-dependent era, these underestimate the power of the human mind. It is surprisingly good at developing “mental maps” of an area, a skill new research shows can grow stronger with use. The question is, with disuse — say, by relying on a GPS device — can we lose the skill, too?

This is why I refuse to get a GPS (or accept one given to me). I prefer building neural connections and don’t mind getting lost a couple times in order to have a stronger mind.

In this moment I don’t feel like the biggest nerd on earth for admitting that.
Source: fuckyeahneuroscience