The Human Body - Did You Know?

• Scientists say the higher your I.Q. The more you dream.
• The largest cell in the human body is the female egg and the smallest is the male sperm.
• You use 200 muscles to take one step.
• The average woman is 5 inches shorter than the average man.
• Your big toes have two bones each while the rest have three. • A pair of human feet contain 250,000 sweat glands.
• A full bladder is roughly the size of a soft ball.
• The acid in your stomach is strong enough to dissolve razor blades.
• The human brain cell can hold 5 times as much information as the Encyclopedia Britannica.
• It takes the food seven seconds to get from your mouth to your stomach.
• The average human dream lasts 2-3 seconds.
• Men without hair on their chests are more likely to get cirrhosis of the liver than men with hair.
• At the moment of conception, you spent about half an hour as a single cell.
• There is about one trillion bacteria on each of your feet.
• Your body gives off enough heat in 30 minutes to bring half a gallon of water to a boil.
• The enamel in your teeth is the hardest substance in your body.
• Your teeth start growing 6 months before you are born.
• When you are looking at someone you love, your pupils dilate; they do the same when you are looking at someone you hate.
• Blondes have more hair than dark-haired people.
• Your thumb is the same length of your nose.

The Birdman Of Idaho

From CBS News:
A remarkable American original lives in the panhandle of Idaho.

Over the last eight decades, Bird has seen enough history and rubbed elbows with enough legends to rival that other Forrest, Forrest Gump.

Chances are Bird's invention has saved the life of someone you know [like my sister], maybe even your own. And though he may not be a household name, when inventors get together Bird stands literally head and shoulders above the rest.

At the annual gathering of the National Inventors Hall Of Fame, America's visionary tinkerers are honored.

There's Patsy Sherman, who invented Scotchgard to protect the rug and the furniture, Dr. Harry Coover, who invented Super Glue to hold your stuff together, and Dr. Klaus Schmeigel, who invented Prozac to hold your head together.

And standing tall among them, all 6'4" of him, is Forrest Bird. His brainchild, the modern medical respirator, has given the breath of life to countless people around the world. It all began with a gizmo he cobbled together long ago to help a friend with emphysema breathe.

"I went to the hardware store and got a doorknob. You can see this doorknob right here at the top," Bird explains. "So the patient would push down like this on the doorknob and blow their lungs up. He did remarkably well with it."

The year was 1947 and Bird says he didn't have the "foggiest" idea that he was on the trail of inventing a device that would become one of the most routine parts of emergency medicine. "I mean, this was seeing a problem and coming up with a rudimentary answer, that was all," he says.

And that answer came from one of this tinkerer's many passions: aviation. Bird is an old flyboy who still takes to the skies in a souped-up 1938 Piper Cub that belonged to his father.

"My daddy was a World War I pilot, and I just wanted to be able to fly like he did," Bird says.

Bird spent World War II delivering aircraft from the factory to the front, and got to thinking along the way about the similarities between air flowing over the wings of a plane and air moving through the human lung.

"In that lung is rudimentary air foils. It's like a million airplane wings all down through the lungs. In and out, all the way through, that facilitate your normal, spontaneous breathing. So it was just applying all this," Bird explains. "Taking it from aviation."

It sounds simple enough, a concept even school kids can grasp. But in reality, the human lung works with mind-numbing complexity. For his own education, the military sent Bird to medical school. And though his studies took him to the outer limits of science, his next respirator was still definitely low tech.

For example, he used strawberry shortcake tins to construct one of his early machines. "And what I did was, I put a diaphragm in here so that when you did that, it would drop the pressure and this magnet would grab it and hold it off," he explains.

Back then, there weren't many options for people with respiratory problems. The worst cases required iron lungs, which were big, primitive, expensive and confining.

So Bird kept on trying to develop a small, affordable device that could automatically help people breathe. His breakthrough came in the late 1950s with the "Bird Mark 7" respirator, a device so effective the Air Force made a training film about it, with Hollywood music and all.

"We were able to assist your respiration. We could control it," Bird explains.

The respirator, Bird says, became standard use "throughout the entire world."

"And still today, there's tens of thousands of these still functioning around," he says.

For more click here.

Let’s Get Clinical About Drugs

Start by thinking about the mandate: first do no harm

Let’s face it, almost everyone in the Western World (if you’re sitting at a computer reading this, that’s probably you) uses some form of medication every single day. A medication is essentially anything that alters the state of cellular structures. So whether you wittingly ingest multivitamins on a daily basis, whether you’ve been prescribed anti-depressants for life, or whether you brush your teeth, you’re exposed to chemicals and potions human beings would otherwise not be exposed to.

The consensus is, of course, that medicine does far more good than harm. I’m going to challenge that perception, and as I do, I will no longer use the term ‘medicine’, but instead make use of the familiar American term ‘drugs’. I also prefer the frankness of a ‘Drug Store’ than the more subtle ‘Pharmacy’.

Let’s starts at a basic level. The foods consumed in America are controlled by the FDA (Food and Drug Administration). Thus we can see that even in what we eat on a daily basis, there are medically/laboratory derived chemicals (preservatives etc) that we consume, apparently without harm. Except over time we do discover that sodium (think Monosodium Glutamate (MSG) and sodium benzoate)is present in just about all processed foods to enhance flavour, but what it does is it essentially loads our bodies with excess salt. The addictive effects of MSG are well known, but it is the widespread use of it that may in part explain why heart disease is one of the leading causes of death, and has never been more prevalent in human history than now. It is common knowledge that too much salt interferes wirth homeostasis, causing high blood pressure. High blood pressure causes heart disease and many other health problems.

Saccharin – used as a sweetener – also turns out to induce cancer in Lab animals, but no one is willing to hazard a guess how many people have died from cancers directly or indirectly related to the use of saccharin. Saccharin is often found in conventional juices and sodas. Avoid coffee creamers (deadly bacteria) and eating too much dairy ice cream (yucky yobs of artery clogging fats) too, if you want what's good for you.

Moving from food to treating our consumption of food, it’s been demonstrated that fluoride (used in all toothpaste) is carcinogenic. Move to vitamins and anti-oxidants, and particularly in men, aggressive cancers (including pancreatic) have been proved to occur. This is a particularly ironic area, since isn’t the purpose of taking multivitamins and associated chemicals/drugs to boost the immunity, not compromise it? Yet it has not been proved that multivitamins pose any benefit to already healthy people. It has been demonstrated though that a balanced diet does produce this effect.

Other drugs used conventionally are anti-depressants. There is a very high statistic for the number of people who commit suicide after being on a course of anti-depressants. My mother is one such statistic. Thus, if having started using these drugs, one is literally facing a death sentence when offered the choice, or making it independently, to wean dependence on these mood enhancers.

Generic medicines like aspirin, while useful, when used even for moderate periods cause inflation and even ulceration of the stomach lining. Aspirin is also just one example of a drug that is highly susceptible to being abused by those seeking a recreational benefit, as opposed to treatment-specific results.

Without a medical background, it is not easy to go through the list of what might be termed the Higher Order of Medicine. But even these medicines aren't all silver lining without cloud. So let us consider just three examples: Corticosteroids. These are used to treat arthritus, and thus reduce pain. But like many drugs, even moderate use can be poisonous or harmful. To maximize the benefits of a corticosteroid, but minimize potential side effects, corticosteroids are usually prescribed in low doses or for very short durations. My grandfather had severe arthritis and died in his late forties of a cortisol overdose. He death was as a result of medical people simply not knowing how much was safe to prescribe, and this lack of appreciating how sensitive the human apparatus is to interference continues. And it is far more prevalent than we imagine.

Treating Parkinson's with Dopamine over the short term may radically reverse symptoms, but over the longer term, it may accelerate the disease. These are vital distinctions.

Thalidomide (causing foetuses to be born with shrunken arms the size of chicken wings) is the most obvious example of medicating without sufficient circumspection. We need to be very sensitive about how and why we pour the chemicals we do, into our bodies.

At this point, one must remember the imperative all doctors are supposedly taught: the Hippocratic Oath. Ironically one of the most widespread misconceptions about medicine possibly lies here. Primum non nocere, ‘First do no harm’ does not come from the Hippocratic Oath but is sort’ve indirectly construed from it, specifically according to the following ranslation: "Declare the past, diagnose the present, foretell the future; practice these acts. As to diseases, make a habit of two things — to help, or at least to do no harm."

Declaring the past and diagnosing the present means that when treating an affliction, we take some time and care in looking at the source (what causes it). Far too many treatments are interested only in relieving symptoms. This is much like a margarine advertisement currently on South African television, which features a person running with a warm and fuzzy voiceover about ‘taking care of one’s heart’.

Some research may suggest a link between cholesterol reduction and heart disease, and so this epithet is overemphasized to suggest that consuming tubs of margarine is actually ‘healthy for one’s heart'. Of course nothing could be further from the truth, but without due consideration for the source of an affliction (and not just a detail extracted and iconized), treatment can be harmful rather than effectual.

In the movie City of Angels, the character played by Meg Ryan demonstrates a reality that more doctors and patients need to be aware of. At the end of the day, it is neither the doctor nor drugs (prescribed or otherwise) that cause the body to heal. In fact, healing happens spontaneously. The body heals itself, but the value in a doctor or drug lies in the sense that the body might be worn out or unable to extricate itself from a disease causing scenario, and especially in these cases the body should then be assisted and supported in its own healing process.

Once again, how harm has come to the body in the first place is far more important than any other step, as finding the behaviour or circumstance that is causing pain/depression/illness provides the body with an opportunity to heal on its own. Indeed the psychosomatic link to illness can't be overemphasised. At some point we consent to the overburdening of our immune systems, and sickness (for example a cold)is a response to that unhealthy choice.

In the world today, smoking, drinking, the consumption of various foods, the conventional culture of self-medication and other common lifestyle choices add up to an unhealthy response. In this sense, the responsibility to remain healthy is ours, especially since we instinctively know what is healthy. Drugs, while sometimes useful, are a double edged sword. They help and they harm, they heal and they wound. It is when we are aware of this, and no longer choose to medicate weaknesses, addictions and dependencies, that we can begin the process of healing ourselves, and finding the road to long and abundant life.

Biologists Are Making Skin Cells Work Like Stem Cells

By Nicholas Wade
June 7, 2007

In a surprising advance that could sidestep the ethical debates surrounding stem cell biology, researchers have come much closer to a major goal of regenerative medicine, the conversion of a patient’s cells into specialized tissues that might replace those lost to disease.

The advance is an easy-to-use technique for reprogramming a skin cell of a mouse back to the embryonic state. Embryonic cells can be induced in the laboratory to develop into many of the body’s major tissues.

If the technique can be adapted to human cells, researchers could use a patient’s skin cells to generate new heart, liver or kidney cells that might be transplantable and would not be rejected by the patient’s immune system. But scientists say they cannot predict when they can overcome the considerable problems in adapting the method to human cells.

Previously, the only way to convert adult cells to embryonic form has been by nuclear transfer, the insertion of an adult cell’s nucleus into an egg whose own nucleus has been removed. The egg somehow reprograms the nucleus back to an embryonic state. That procedure is known as therapeutic cloning when applied to people, but no one has yet succeeded in doing it.

For the full story visit www.nytime.com or click on the title of this post.

The Vitamin Conspiracy

Are our attempts to boost immunity doing more harm than good?

It was in a Biology class when I was a teenager, that I first learned the concept that excess Vitamin C is carcinogenic. I remember reading the section of text a few times over, and then passing it around. It was hard to believe then, and now, years later, people use vitamins even more, far in excess of recommended levels.

Dr. Michael Leitzmann and his colleagues have discovered that men who ingest excess vitamins are particularly vulnerable to cancer of the prostate. When men habitually ingest more than the 7 recommended doses in a given week, their chances of contracting an advanced cancer spikes 30%; the chance of contracting a deadly cancer doubles through this same habit of consuming excess multivitamins. These findings are based on almost 300 000 men who were studied over a 5 year period to determine a link between prostate cancer and multivitamin use.

No general cancer risk was evident; instead the risk was related to a more aggressive cancer, capable of moving beyond the prostate gland. The message then is directed at men; that if they must take multivitamins, to stick to the prescribed doses.

In terms of the anti-oxidants (A, E and beta-carotene), 47 clinical trials conducted by the Cochrane Centre on 180 000 volunteers determined a greater risk of death as a result of merely making use of these supplements. No evidence, for example, was found that anti-oxidants were able to prevent cardiovascular infections. It was also determined that the consumption of these supplements did more harm than good in healthy subjects, as opposed to pregnant women or others (e.g. those HIV positive) suffering from chronic vitamin deficiencies.

Vitamin C and selenium was found to neither decrease the risk of death, or increase it (at the correct dosage), meaning, there was a negligible benefit if any.

The trend is that although many people aren’t sure that vitamins are effective, they consume and use them on the off chance that they might be. Now we have clinical evidence to prove the cardinal error in this line of thinking.

Prof. Jimmy Volmink (of the South African Cochrane Centre) commenting on research conducted by the Cochrane Centre, recommends that vitamins be sought directly at source: in produce, such as fruits and vegetables.

Volmink also added that it is more beneficial to one’s health to go on a long holiday, than to take anti-oxidants.

Of course, the reason millions of people use vitamins in the first place is because it is Big Business, and Big Business sells it to consumers under the guise of supposed (potential but not proven) efficacy. AC Nielsen pegged the total sales value of vitamins sold in 2006 (in South Africa) at R570 million. This figure is increasing at over 25% a year, according to the report by AC Nielsen.

For some years, aware of the fallacy surrounding vitamins, I have critically looked at the language advertisers use to promote everything from anti-aging creams to vitamins. In almost every case, the emotive language makes use of crucial qualifiers, like ‘can’, or ‘may’, and in some cases ‘helps’.
Example:
So Vitamin X can bring health to your whole family. Be vigilant! Be discerning!
Sure it can, but not in terms of the way it is packaged. Vitamins that are packaged are seldom, if ever, effective, and even when they might be they need to be absorbed at the correct levels and often in combination with other substances such as minerals, enzymes etc. Buying vitamins off a shelf as the product advertised is simply a deception. In the same way that misleading tobacco advertising has been addressed, the same generally misrepresentative advertising and labelling ought to be nipped in the bud with regard to vitamin products.

Being aware of this, I asked my doctor to prescribe something that would really help boost immunity (following a secondary lung infection). He suggested Moducare, a formula which contains plant sterols and sterolins. On the packaging it claims to be: The only formula proven in extensive research. The dosage is high, 1 tablet 3 times daily.

Once again it seems as though laziness is what drives us to put our faith in vitamins in pill form. We are a society wanting to eat junk which robs the body of vital nutrients – such as the diuretics: caffeine and alcohol – but then we think we can play catch-up by fueling up on vitamins. It doesn’t happen that way. This approach costs us not only our health, but money otherwise better spent.

The way to health then is a straightforward but not necessarily convenient approach: regularly purchase fruit and vegetables. Preparing vegetables is also important when we’re conscious of their vitamin value. Avoid microwaving. Rather steam your vegetables until they are soft enough to eat. Boiling is best to avoid too since what the heat doesn’t kill, the goodness that remains goes into the water poured out of the pot.

Fruits can be consumed as is, but not substituted for fruit juice. The reason why fruits have vitamins and not fruit juices was explained to me once by a Hungarian doctor. It made an impression that stayed with me ever since. As soon as you kill an animal, or pluck a fruit from a tree, the vitality in the tissues of that plant or animal immediately begin to fall. Vitamins are precious threads of vitality in living organisms, but once the tissue is dead, the vitamin quality erodes quickly. Imagine it as a gas that seeps out with the spent lifeforce. The next step is imagining the storage of these vitamins, for days, weeks and months, alongside preservatives and other chemicals. The life and goodness has long since left the building. Thus the idea that consuming fruit juice as a credible substitute for the source fruit is simply crazy. Orange juice for example is rarely orange, and tastes nothing like freshly squeezed oranges. Also, original orange juice does not preserve well, nor for very long (as do many other juices). Even when natural preservatives are used (such as from apples and grapes), in the end it is still an artificial beverage that often has more sugar than soda pop, and very limited nutritional value.

Vitamins packed on shelves in pharmacies and supermarkets are therefore a big con. Why? Because vitamins, the vitality of the host, cannot be stored. Minerals, of course can be.
So if you are serious about looking after your health, or boosting your immunity, bear in mind The Vitamin Conspiracy. The old tried and trusted common denominators are free or cheap, and will add years of quality to your life: eat fresh produce every day, exercise, get enough sleep, rest and find time to live and laugh.

Background for this article sourced and translated from an article by Diana-Marie Strydom: Antioksidante kan jou dood beteken, se navorsers (Antioxidants kan kill you, researchers say).

Hair today, gone tomorrow, back the next day...

from: http://www.guardian.co.uk

Gene therapy holds out hope for baldness cure
Ian Sample, science correspondent
Thursday May 17 2007
The Guardian

Skin cells have been primed to regrow hair follicles for the first time, leading scientists to claim a breakthrough in the quest for a cure for baldness.

Researchers hope that a treatment for hair loss may be within sight after healthy hair-producing follicles were regenerated in adult skin in mice.

The team made the breakthrough by awakening a sequence of dormant genes, which triggered a flood of stem cells into patches of hairless skin. To the researchers' surprise, the stem cells were able to form hair follicles.

The findings overturned scientists' belief that mammals are born with a set number of hair follicles and are unable to grow new ones.

While newts and salamanders are known to be capable of regenerating entire limbs, researchers believed mammals had a much more restricted ability to regrow body tissues. The researchers discovered the effect during experiments into the healing mechanisms of the animals. When thin sheets of skin were taken from the rodents, the researchers found that not only did the skin heal, but it reformed with new hair follicles.

Tests revealed that a set of genes, which are switched off shortly after the embryo stage of development, had been re-awakened, causing stem cells to rush to the site of the wound and generate new follicles.

Further studies showed that injecting a protein called Wnt onto the patch of skin doubled the number of hair follicles that formed. By blockling Wnt proteins in the animals, the researchers were able to stop the growth of new hair follicles.

George Cotsarelis, a dermatologist at the University of Pennsylvania who led the study said: "We've found that we can influence wound healing with Wnts or other proteins that allow the skin to heal in a way that has less scarring and includes all the normal structures of skin, such as hair follicles and oil glands, rather than just a scar." The research is reported in the journal Nature.

The scientists claim the findings have broader implications than a cure for male-pattern baldness, suggesting it raises the possibility of treatments for other follicle-related disorders, such as acne, scalp conditions and excessive hair growth. The researchers are now licensing the technology through a American company called Follica Inc.

"Up to now we thought that the number of hair follicles we have is set before we were born and can only go downhill from there," said Denis Headon, a developmental biologist at Manchester University. "This work shows that new hair follicles are made in adult skin, at least when it is healing a wound. The researchers also found a way to artificially soup up this natural process, causing mice to grow twice as many new hairs by giving the skin a specific molecular signal. The implication is that it might be simpler than we thought to make new hair follicles as a treatment for hair loss."

Desmond Tobin, director of the medical biosciences research group at the University of Bradford, said: "It was long thought that hair follicle development, under physiological conditions, was limited to early developmental process.

"Now Cotsarelis' team have convincingly shown that under the conditions peculiar to the wound-healing environment, the highly complex hair follicle can be created anew from apparently unremarkable cells of the healing epidermis and its underlying dermis."
Copyright Guardian News and Media Limited