Titan1290

Cancer is difficult to cure due to so many factors! Most cancers aren't even detectable until they are malignant (metastasised) and grown to a critical mass, by then the damage is already done. New techniques needs to be found in order to just discover cancer let alone cure it. Plus there are so many types of cancer, the word cancer is used to describe lung cancers, colorectal cancers and breast cancers etc. Within each of these organs the cancer categories can be subdivided into even more cancers depending on the cell type or location. For example lung cancer can be divided into - small cell and non small cell or it can be divided by location such as bronchogenic or alveolar. Also the cancerous cells may look nothing like the normal cells for that particular organ as the cancer cell will be poorly differentiated compared to the normal adult cell. Why is it so difficult to cure ? Because, I highly doubt one drug will cure all cancers etc. Say we even find a drug that cures all lung cancers this drug will have to also have minimal side effects and will have to take 10 years or so to be processed and brought to the market.

Everything said above is good, I just wanted to add for ATP synthase there is 3 conformations: open, loose and tight these are examples of conformational changes and usually occur when the reactant comes in contact with the active site. You can read through it here and see a nice picture. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATP_synthase This increases reaction rate because there is more chance of the reactants coming together to react and form the product. As you said it's not squishing the protein it's about increasing the chance that they will come together. In one of the laboratories I did to investigate oxygen utilisation and ATP formation. The reaction rate increased by adding ADP to ATP synthase (mitochondrial cells) this was because of the higher concentration of ADP and also because this increased chance of ADP coming in contact with ATP synthase enzyme. Also another way to prove this is by adding a competitive inhibitor. If you add a competitive inhibitor to the reaction you will notice the reaction rate will decrease. This is because the competitive inhibitor is competing for the active site as I said before it's all about the probablilty/chance of the reaction to happen.

I assume you know most of the chemiosmotic theory so with that in mind I will try to answer your question. 1) The first point you make is very easy to answer if a reduction reaction occurs then an oxidation reaction must occur as well that's why it is called a redox reaction they must happen in pairs. The electrons in the reaction are passed from a donor to an acceptor. 2) Molecules are changing for ATP production. ATP production is fueled by the proton motive force that is hydrogen ions (cations) diffusing through ATP synthase converting ADP and phosphate to ATP. The hydrogen ions move from the high concentration inside the cell to the low concentration outside the cell then through ATP synthase as mentioned above. The hydrogen ions are generated by redox reactions such as NADH ---> NAD+ + H+ + 2e- This reaction would be oxidation because you are losing electrons and gaining a hydrogen ion (this is only half of the reaction remember you would still need the reduction). The way I remember this is that our metabolism (ATP production) is oxidative which means compounds like NADH will be oxidised in order to produce ATP in the long run. Hopefully that will answer your second point. 3) If you read more about the chemiosmotic theory you will realise all these electrons produced will be passed along the carrier proteins in order drive the movement of the hydrogen ions across the membrane. I tried to answer your questions as best I could, hopefully answered some of your questions. I find it a lot easier if you draw a big diagram of what is going on especially for this topic. Hopefully others will reply and be able to explain things better than I could good luck!

CharonY is right I miss read that point but everything else was right my mistake!

I read in a textbook (Lauralee Sherwood from cells to systems 7th edition chapter 17) that "an increased glucose utilisation inhibits food intake". I thought that using glucose would not inhibit food intake but do the opposite. I would like to know the mechanisms involved here and i'm not really sure if this is a question of psysiology or perhaps metabolism (although this information was taken from a physiology textbook). It would be great if someone could provide the mechanisms involved or an explanation perhaps some links, thanks.

Very simple what happens if a predators prey dies off. The extinction of 'worthless' prey species may lead to the extinction of an important predator species. This 'worthless' species may also have useful part/parts for medicine/other branches of science/other areas. I'm not really into religion but probably from a religious view point this may be immoral, certainly unethical by animal rights groups. If these animals that are going extinct are put in a zoo (PROVIDING THEY ARE CARED FOR WELL) then it lets the younger generation/whole world be interested in biology. I don't see why killing off very rare numbers of animals would do anything good since they aren't taking up much space or going to do severe damage. If it is a pest species then maybe monitoring it's location and making sure it doesn't cause havoc apart from that I cannot see any reason to kill animals if they might actually help us someway in the future.

Oh I thought humans could only learn to echolocate this is why it can happen with blind people. Point I was making is that some animal doing something special and better than us doens't prove it is more intelligent than us maybe I didn't pick the best example Sayonara.

You are basically asking to calculate photosynthesis perhaps your answer lies here http://www.biologie.uni-rostock.de/oekologie/literature/RMB/Heft%2006/RMB-06-K%F6hler-017.pdf

It's a Pasteur Pipette http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasteur_pipette I would never call it a pipette but that's just me

I can answer question 1) Neo-endorphin is cleaved from prodynorphin. Prodynorphin makes up endorphin so obviously the neo-endorphin is smaller than endorphin. I can answer question 2) The neo-endorphins seem to have some kind of sensory function and regulate ADH release. The endorphins act as inhibitory pain signals you can find more information here http://www.4adi.com/objects/catalog/product/extras/SP-100053-5.pdf For question 3) This link should give you a better answer, from reading I would say Beta-endorphin as there seems to be a lot more known about. http://www.livestrong.com/article/435947-does-exercising-give-you-endorphins/

We need moles or molarity to answer this!

This might be a little too basic I don't know much chemistry but from what I can see it looks like water has been removed leaving a phenyl group linked to the benzene ring with 2 carbons and a hydroxyl group left off the ring. The hydroxyl is negatively charged could it be attracted more towards the benzene due to bond enthalpies/charge. Hope more people comment a chemist will be able to answer this better than me.

Ed Earl is going about the right way to do this defining intelligence/measuring intelligence is the first step to be able to answer this question. As Ed Earl said below: as well as defining intelligence you would have to identify/classify all the different types of intelligence. BUT bats can use echolocation and we cannot is this because they are more intelligent than us or not ? Bats have probably adapted to use echolocation because of adaptation.That then for makes me believe that perhaps the adaptation rate and intelligence of a species may be linked. Then another question how does one measure adaption rate ? The point is there is far to many variables here and if this was such and easy question since science would have had a definitive answer for the most intelligent species. The way to find an answer for your question would be to identify all these variables that make up intelligence and also understanding how all these factors work in relation to intelligence.

By yawning and not being in your body where it is really hot also I think you lose something like 60% of heat out of your head (the last on may be a myth but what i'm saying is a lot of heat is lost from your by head which means it might not get terribly hot up there anyway).

This is interesting http://list25.com/25-most-intelligent-animals-on-earth/2/ and I would give you an answer but how does one measure intelligence ? Perhaps I should make that a question!