Biomedical Engineering

I first met the engineer fish, Pholidichthys leucotaenia, on a recent trip to California when I visited the California Academy of Sciences . The Academy's Naturalist Center Coordinator was kind enough to provide a picture as well as some additional details about the engineer fish.


Engineer Fish - Pholidichthys leucotaenia

Pholidichthys leucotaenia is commonly known as the engineer fish because of it's digging or undermining behavior. In captivity, engineering fish are often observed digging extensive tunnels in the sandy substrate under aquarium rock work. The Engineer Goby working to a beat Youtube video demonstrates its digging behavior. It is also known as engineer goby, convict blenny, Convict Worm Goby, Pacific Neon Goby, Convict Worm Blenny or just "Engineer". In nature, they are like normal fish. They eat, swim and chase other engineer fish around. Engineer fish are easy to keep in captivity. They don't bother other fish their size and eat almost anything. They are prolific and good parents producing 400 to 500 spawn at one time (see Mated Pair of Engineer Gobies ) The younger engineering fish form schools that are often found under ledges or around coral heads. Juveniles resemble the venomous striped catfish Plotosus lineatus. Older adults engineering fish like other blennies live secretively and reclusively in reefs and have a barred or spotted color pattern. Engineer fish inhabit shallow lagoons and coastal reefs from the Philippines south to the Solomon Islands. An article on the Wetwebmedia site sums up the fish the best: "Though indeed an "oddball" as marine fishes go, the engineer goby, convict blenny, whatever you call Pholidichthys leucotaenia is a gem of a marine fish for aquarists. It's hardy to the extreme, accepting of almost all food and tankmate situations, intelligent and interesting behaviorally."

The resemblance to real engineers is uncanny.

Human engineers or engineering humans when confined to a cube also create extensive drawings and designs. Civil engineering humans have even been observed creating extensive tunnel network designs (e.g., mines). Once released from their cubes, human engineers eat, imbibe drink, run, swim, ski, bike and chase other humans. Engineers are easily kept in their cubes and don't tend to bother other cubemates or co-workers. They tend to be good spouses and parents. Engineers can be fed almost anything like "We're working on a career path…". The younger engineering humans join clubs such as Dungeon & Dragons, astronomy or other geeky groups to socialize with other nerdy aspiring engineers. As some engineering humans mature, they have been observed adopting reclusive, oddball and anti-social behavior - often not attending group functions and obsessing about White Castle Vending Machines (See picture below). Engineering humans inhabit cubes across all continents.


Example of a Reclusive Engineer - Rogeringus Pinkies

Resources:
http://scienceray.com/biology/marine-biology/engineer-goby-pholidichthys-leucotaenia/
http://www.liveaquaria.com/product/prod_display.cfm?c=15+31+165&pcatid=165

Scientific classification

Kingdom: Animalia

Phylum: Chordata

Class: Actinopterygii

Order: Perciformes

Family: Pholidichthyidae.

Binomial name: Pholidichthys leucotaenia

Aimed to protect women from AIDS in Africa and other impoverished areas, a new kind of "molecular condom" is currently in development. This new option would allow women to protect themselves without the approval of their partner, and could be especially helpful in areas of the world where women are not empowered to force their partners to wear condoms.

How Does It Work?

Contracting the HIV infection in women happens when the virus transfers from semen to vaginal tissue. By using this new gel that hardens at the pH of semen, it blocks the transfer of the virus.

After sex, the vagina will become acidic again, which will make any remaining HIV particles ineffective by the acidity and the antiviral drug that is in the gel. The antiviral drug impedes HIV to some extent, but is more to protect immune cells in the vagina from infection.

Rocky Past?

Not many antiviral drugs attack HIV in semen, and with the high air temperature in places like Africa, it is difficult to coat the vagina evenly. Few microbicides have reached human trials with respect to preventing the AIDS virus from being transmitted. The microbicides that managed to get to clinical trial were later proven ineffective at preventing HIV transmission.

There were many reasons why the microbicides may have failed. Sometimes the antiviral drugs used in them were not strong enough, nor could they live long enough to be effective. In some cases, the risk of contracting HIV was increased; this may have been because the vaginal tissue was irritated and attracted immune cells that the virus targets.

Promising Future?

Another problem in the past was that patients failed to even use them. The intravaginal gel seems to be more convenient to use than other microbicides, like rings and films. Right now, they are testing the use of other polymers and the safety of the gel on vaginal cells. Thanks to a grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation of $100,000, this will be a continued effort.

If this is successful in Africa at preventing AIDS, do you think that it should be used internationally?

Resources:

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/160338.php

I may not be a parent, but I do have ears. Over the years, I've heard that giving your children too much sugar makes them hyperactive. I've heard this ever since I was a kid myself during the 1970s, when sugar cereals began to get a bad rap.

Later, when I worked for the phone company, I would occasionally buy a 2-ft-long Pixy Stix to get a "sugar rush" and make Friday afternoons more interesting. You might say that I took the sugar-makes-you-hyper myth to heart.

So, to learn that sugar doesn't have this effect on human behavior surprised me as much as I'm sure it would surprise any parent who's watched his or her offspring "go bonkers" after eating Halloween candy.

Studying the Myth

Most medical experts agree that there are no scientific studies which prove that eating certain foods affects a child's behavior (or an adult's, for that matter). While it is possible that even small amounts of sugar may affect some children, sugar is not so powerful as to seriously affect everyone's behavior.

Why do so many parents still believe the sugar-makes-kids-hyper myth then? One study from 1994 provides an answer to that question. In The Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, Daniel Hoover and Richard Milich tested thirty-one boys ranging in age from 5 to 7 years old whose mothers described them as "behaviorally affected by sugar."

The boys were split into two groups. In one, the mothers were told that their sons would be fed extra-sugary Kool-Aid. In the other, the mothers were told that their sons were the control group and would be given a drink with aspartame. In reality, both groups were given the artificial sweetener. The researchers then videotaped the mothers and sons playing together. Afterwards, the mothers were given a survey about how they thought their son had behaved.

Predictably, the mothers who believed their sons were in the "extra-sugary" group claimed their boys exhibited symptoms of hyperactivity. The researchers also noticed that these mothers tended to hover over their sons and be more critical of their behavior. By contrast, the mothers in the "aspartame-only" group seemed to get along better with their children.

Warning: Happiness May Cause Excitability in Children

Here's another reason for the sugar-makes-kids-hyper myth. Children often eat sugary foods at celebrations that excite them - birthday parties, Halloween, and family gatherings. Therefore, the situation itself – and not the eating of sugary foods – leads to behavior that parents interpret as "hyper".

When parents see a change in their child's behavior, they often recall the last treat was ingested instead of considering the circumstances that may have produced the behavior. Attributing hyperactivity to only diet or only certain food ingredients is too simplistic. There is more hyperactivity than a daily bowl of Honey Smacks every morning.

Granted, some studies suggest that there is a correlation between diet and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). So perhaps every so often a researcher will come across a child whose condition truly is affected by sugar. But when parents go nuts because a can of Coke has supposedly made their kids uncontrollable, it's more likely they're just seeing the behavior they expect to see.

Resources:

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=52516

http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/children/9911/22/diet.sugar.myth.kids.wmd/

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2747/does-giving-sweets-to-kids-produce-a-sugar-rush

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/515073/sugar_high_myth_or_reality.html?cat=5

http://www.parents.com/family-life/better-parenting/parenting-style/14-surprising-myths-about-parenthood/?page=2

http://www.healthunit.org/nutrition/lifecycle/toddler/commonmyths.htm

http://listverse.com/2009/02/15/top-10-common-medical-myths/

For the past three years, I've been an exercise junkie. Most of that time has been spent on cardio activities such as running, biking, and kickboxing. Because I'm also an avid reader, I've purchased many books on the subject of exercise. All of them assert that weight training is an integral part of any exercise program.

Since I always believed that weight training was a bore, I initially chose to ignore this vast body of advice. Thankfully, I woke up to the truth about the importance of weight training. I've since found a routine that works well for me and my schedule, and am now a convert.

Because I'm a woman, I'm not laboring to attain huge amounts of muscle mass. My goals for weight training are to become as strong as my body allows, and to prevent osteoporosis. Believe me, I would love to be able to achieve the muscular prowess of Linda Hamilton in Terminator 2, but I have no desire to spend hours in the gym every day.

Burly Boxers and Fictional Fourth-Graders

Even before I began weight training, I had often heard the claim that consuming extra protein helps to build muscle. From Rocky Balboa eating raw eggs, to Eric Cartman consuming ridiculous amounts of Weight Gain 4000, this claim is not only prevalent among some weight lifters, but in our media as well. So is it true?

The bottom line is simple: no! The Mayo Clinic asserts that regardless of whether you are trying to gain, lose or maintain your weight, your daily dietary intake of protein should be 10-35% of your diet. Typically, the food that Americans eat is so protein-rich that most of this percentage comes from our regular diet – meaning that protein supplements are unnecessary. For weightlifters, the typical estimate is 1 gram of protein per pound of bodyweight per day.

Would Mr. Mackey Say that "Carbs Are Bad"?

In this day and age, carbohydrates are either touted as unnecessary for building muscle or as the primary reason for fat gain. Neither is true! So, don't hold your breath for an episode of South Park where Mr. Mackey tells the kids that another five-letter word (carbs) are "bad".

To build muscle, carbohydrates are a must-have. Carbs are what fuel the body for exercise. They work with protein synergistically to fuel the body's ability to drive amino acids into muscles, resulting in their growth. Carbs also keep that newly-built muscle from breaking down.

Finally, carbohydrates set the groundwork for the environment that plays a critical role in muscle growth. Carbs initiate the release of insulin, which increases protein uptake by muscles. Insulin also aids muscles to assimilate testosterone, the body's primary muscle-building hormone.

Yes, it is possible that athletes and serious weight lifters need more protein than the proverbial couch potato. But they also need more fats and carbs as well.

Too Much Protein is Hazardous to Your Health

So what happens when too much protein is consumed? Because the body cannot store protein as energy, excess protein breaks down into amino acids and nitrogen, which are either excreted or converted into carbohydrates and stored – as fat. Excess protein can also result in kidney and liver damage, dehydration, and nutrient imbalance.

So toss away those raw eggs and protein shakes, and pick up those weights!

Resources:

http://www.ific.org/foodinsight/1998/so/proteinfi598.cfm

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0801/is_9_66/ai_n14921214/?tag=content;col1

http://listverse.com/food/top-10-food-myths-debunked/

http://www.active.com/fitness/Articles/7_Muscle_Myths.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_in_nutrition

http://www.acefitness.org/fitnessqanda/fitnessqanda_display.aspx?itemid=272

Like most people, I love to eat. I've never been a fan of "dieting" and think most diets are doomed to failure. But in this weight-conscious, overfed, and under-exercised culture of ours, I know that many people are always on the lookout for quick and easy ways to lose weight.

For as long as I can remember, I've heard that certain foods, most notably celery, have "negative calories" – meaning that it takes more calories to eat the celery than the celery itself contains. So is it true that eating this crunchy vegetable is the secret to weight loss?

Chew Your Food

All foods contain calories, units of energy that our bodies "burn" through metabolic processes. The notion of negative-calorie (NC) foods depends on the idea that chewing and digesting these foods burns more calories than the food contains. Granted, it does take a bit of effort to chew celery, but you actually burn more calories by taking a shower than you do by chewing a celery stalk. In the case of celery then, let's turn our attention to digestion.

Readers, Digest This

An average stick of celery contains about 6 calories and is loaded with cellulose, a vegetable fiber that humans cannot digest. NC foodies claim that it takes more than 6 calories for humans to digest this fiber, thereby creating a calorie deficit. According to a test done at the Mayo Clinic, however, the amount of energy that the human body uses to digest celery does not exceed the number of calories that celery contains. According to the study, the digestion of celery burns only 0.5 calories.

Celery isn't the only "negative calorie food", but most of the other ones I've read about are also fruits and vegetables (regardless of actual calorie content). But if the NC food claim was true, vegetarian humans and herbivore animals (such as rabbits) would die of starvation because the mere act of eating (and digesting) would expend calories that were never replaced.

People who experience weight loss by eating celery (or any of the other fruits or vegetables on the many NC lists) probably lose weight because the celery is replacing other, high-calorie foods. Eating fruits and vegetables will help you lose weight. These foods are very filling. Plus, because of their low calorie content, dieters can eat fruits and veggies in larger quantities than high-calorie foods.

So if you're looking to lose weight, eating celery (or ANY fruit or vegetable) will definitely get you on the right track. But like all the other too-good-to-be-true diet claims out there, don't expect celery to be the magic bullet for easy weight loss!

Resources:

http://www.answerfitness.com/269/negative-calorie-foods-fact-fiction/

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_it_true_that_celery_has_negative_calories

http://www.snopes.com/food/ingredient/celery.asp

http://smallbitesnutrition.blogspot.com/2009/01/you-ask-i-answer-celery-negative.html

http://recipes.howstuffworks.com/question670.htm