CharonY

I do not either. What has been misstated by OP that is the only source of immortalized cell lines. It is also somewhat relevant to put the use in historic context, but obviously it is hard to tell whether other models would have become more popular if HeLa wasn't around and how it may have slowed down research. That being said, it is still heavily used, but research has progressed, obviously. Related to that we do have improved techniques to create and maintain cell lines, although it is still far from trivial.

She is certainly not the only source of immortalized human cells (there are many more established lines) and may not even be the first cell line, but I am pretty sure it is the first successfully established immortalized cell line. This is also a case of questionable research ethics as her cells were taken and used without her knowledge or consent (which would be against all recent ethical guidelines). On a different note, since HeLa cells grow pretty fast and robustly (at least compared to many other cell lines), many labs had problem that they overgrew other tissues. As a result some studies were faulty as they were accidentally conducted with HeLa instead of the actual cells of interest. In terms of medical breakthroughs, it is probably accurate to characterize them as workhorses, a standard tool for human analyses (similar to E. coli as a microbial model). That being said, since more and more cell lines are available and since it is known that different cell lines react very differently to stimuli, they are not as important as they once were.

You are arguing as if quantum effects would add something new to the processes. But they don't. Quantum effects do not increase efficiency of photosynthesis, they are part of it. Virtually anything in the molecular regime is governed by quantum effects if you try to follow the events precisely. However, in chemistry we utilize stochastic models to approximate these events as it is easier and still reasonable accurate for what we want to do. And again, just because we are not really good at bridging the quantum world with the macroscopic world mathematically it does not mean that by adding quantum to the mix we change the output on the macroscopic world. Rather, what we see is the result of all the effects happening on the smaller scale. It is the same, not an added effect.

Yes it just means less than a micron (roughly size of organelle) and it is a common fluff piece to mention quantum effects for added mysticism. Actually, quantum effects tend to be relevant when we go into the lower nm range. And when you think about it, they are part of normal biochemical processes, and not specific to something like the mind. Many electron transfer reactions are best modeled via quantum tunneling, for example. In many ways, it is rather mundane, but complicated.

Well, short as it is that post clearly demonstrates significant lack in a surprising wide range of areas. I will highlight one thing though. Arete has provided important insight into some aspects of a graduate degree and how it relates to succeed in that endeavor. Considering that being able to derive and utilize information is but a very basic skill (even disregarding the need for social skills for now) it casts severe doubts in the ability of the poster to even succeed in undergrad.

I am not sure what you mean. We all do have numerous genes involved in DNA repair in our genome.

tar, are you reading posts before you comment on them? It is a difference of 660 total. So with about 32,000 suicides in that year, the contribution of vets above the normal population would amount to 32,600 suicides, or, an increase of ~0.2%. If you track the numbers over time you see that vet suicides do not contribute much to the overall increase in male mortality. And note that the vet suicide number includes everyone that has served at any given point in their life (i.e. their suicide could be entirely unrelated to their vet experience). What it means is simply that being a male vet increases the rate suicide very slightly, but the overall male suicide rate among non-vets is almost as high. Thus, while suicide may be one contributing factor of the increase in male mortality (with drug abuse being and even more relevant factor), being a vet does not change the number by much. Thus being a vet is not the driving factor behind suicides.

Actually there are already diaxotrophs associated with maize. It is not a strong symbiotic relationship as with rhizobia and legumes, but moderate production increase can be seen in some cases. How to establish these relationships is still the holy grail of nitrogen fixation researchers.

Eh, when in Rome.

Actually the staring just intensifies. Yes on both accounts.

A) The glow is due to a single protein (GFP). Much easier than actually having metabolic activities. B) melons are grown in a square mold. Has nothing to do with genetics. C) There is nothing that "never rots". They can be more resistant to mold, freezing or other things though. Also typically conferred by a single protein. Modifying organisms to exhibit specific phenotypes is much harder than you imagine and we have still huge knowledge gaps to deal with.

Tar, it is simple math. I do not have the precise numbers for the same years but the 32.1 per 100k represent about 6300 suicides. Decreasing it to the national average of 28.7 is about a total of 5632, i.e. an excess of about 660 suicides. However, the total amount of male suicides is about 32k. Thus the 660 would amount to 0.2% difference. Considering that suicide is not even the main driver of mortality this amount is unlikely to contribute significantly to the tally.

Because in order for a system to work it is not enough to just have the genes. They have to assemble protein apparatus, localize it properly and regulate their expression and integrate it into the existing metabolic background. It is incredibly tricky to confer anything that is somewhat more complicated (i.e. more than a handful steps).

Organisms cannot break down CO2. They can however fix it, which I assume is what you mean. It basically only works on bacteria as they are most flexible in use of reducing equivalents (and their ability to dump them) and maybe some unicellular organisms. Overall it is not clear that it has any benefits, as photosynthetic can utilize sunlight. Nitrogen fixation is another thing entirely and while there are bacteria able to do so, we are unable to confer this ability to non-fixing bacteria via genetic modification.

And adhering to specific dress codes also helps to blend in or to display status, if needed. For example, in medical research meetings I wear a suit. It is fitted, indicating I am not a student but its cheapness suggest I am not an MD. Hence it shows that I am a biology researcher. If, on the other hand, I meet mathematicians, I sometimes wear pants.

Errors in replication and other normal biochemical processes also cause mutations. I.e. it happens all the time. Mutagenic substances just increase the likelihood above the normal baseline.

I doubt that is a card reader around that would do that. There is simply no point to make it more sophisticated whilst introducing vulnerability. Well, unless the reader was designed for something else and is just being used as dumbed down version, perhaps.. There are vulnerabilities to exploit, of course (esp. in cases where there some sorts of master keys put in). But it is a very different beast to actually introduce code is something else entirely.

Digital PCR pretty much only refers to the partitioning of the template prior to the reaction. As it can have many different applications, there can be differences when measurements occur. Even in cases of qPCR it is not necessary to monitor continuously as in standard approaches. Rather, the amount of negative to positive partitions and Poisson statistics can be used to calculate amount. In this case an endpoint measurement would suffice.

Broad high level brain activity are actually accompanied by seizures and if most of the brain involved it would be a grand mal. However, assuming you had something like an EEG, they are relatively low resolution. in fact, EEGs are often used monitor seizures. That being said, from what little I remember (and I am by no means qualified) I am not sure how you would interpret "maxing out", as typically the overall waverform shape. For example discrete, bi or triphasic sharp waves can be indicative of epileptiform discharges. If there was no wave (i.e. just a continuous high discharge) it would indicate that one electrodes are not working.

A biosafety cabinet is a laminar flow hood. But not all hoods with laminar flow are biosafety benches. In biosafety benches the flow is straight from top through the filter down on the bench (and then to the back). As a result it creates a barrier that reduces the contact of the user with aerosols. However, it does little to protect samples, except by avoiding turbulence. A horizontal laminar flow bench pushes air from the back to the front. Due to the horizontal flow it protects the sample as it blows things away from it. But it would blow things toward the user which makes it unsuitable for dangerous chemicals and biohazard. Then there are variations with different levels of filters, how much they recirculate etc. So the first thing you need to do is get proper safety instructions in all the cabinets you have in your lab. By understanding the differences you can make the correct choice.

I think the oxalix acid was only ever brought up as something against rust. It is very unlikely to be involved for anti-misting purposes. Here, something is required that can work as whetting reagent/surfactant. In saliva proteins have been suspected (and some found) although I am not sure whether it has been shown whether they are the major components.

Weell it is kind of on topic. If it is oxalic acid spinach and parsely extract would be more efficient by weight than potatoes.That is something relatively easy to test.

The content of oxalix acid is quite low from what I remember, roughly that of onions and peas. Do they also remove rust? Spinach is about 20 times higher. I think I will add parsley, to be safe.

Research instructions unclear; I have now mashed potatoes with caramellized fennel on my windscreen. Is this where I add the potato vodka?

Are you suggesting that Xmas trees got popular because it gets people to procreate....?