Do Genes Relate to Crime?

by Mine G.

"We used to think that our fate was in our stars, but now we know that, in large measure, our fate is in our genes."

-James D. Watson 

        The world that we live on now has become a crime pool. We see murders, robberies, domestic violence news on TV everyday. It happens around us no matter where or who we are. 

        Today, when I received an e-mail from the campus police indicating a robbery, I wondered the reason why crime rates have been increasing. While doing a bit of research about it, I actually came across a fact which I was shocked by: Warrior Gene.

            

         Is crime really a drive that the genes encode?  

            

         First off, let's look at what "Monoamine oxidase A (MAOA)" as known as warrior gene is. It is placed on the X-chromosome, and affects the neurotransmitters dopamine, norepinephrine, and serotonin. It has been showed by the studies that warrior gene plays an important role on people's aggressive behaviors.

            

         

According to a Molecular Psychiatry article, a study done with the participation of almost 900 Finnish offenders in 2014, indicates that up to 10% of the crimes in Finland can be associated with MAOA and variants of CDH13 genes. "Offenders who had committed 10 or more serious violent crimes were significantly more like to carry one of several loss-of-function variants in the MAOA gene or a variant in the CDH13 gene versus participants in population-based survey studies in Finland who were considered representative of the general population." says John Gever, in his article called "Genetic Factors Tied to Violent Behaviors."






However, even though genes play a considerable role in violence, it is not the only aspect. Violence is a phenomenon that involves the combination of genetic determinism, environment and psychological elements. Jan Schnupp says that "to call these alleles 'genes for violence' would therefore be a massive exaggeration. In combination with many other factors these genes may make it a little harder for you to control violent urges, but they most emphatically do not predetermine you for a life of crime."

Aggression and crime are serious issues of the 21st century world. Although violence is partially explained with the genetic determinism by some scientists, it should always be remembered that environment has a huge impact on crime as well. It might be impossible to change the genes' encoding for now, but there is always a chance to make the world far removed from violence.

So, why don't we start making a difference right here, right now?

.




Image: PHOTO BY ABODE OF CHAOS, VIA FLICKR
http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/files/2014/06/dna-shackles.jpg

References:   Powledge, T. M. (2014, November 04). Does the human "warrior gene" make violent criminals--And what should society do? | Genetic Literacy Project. Retrieved February 07, 2016, from https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/11/04/does-the-human-warrior-gene-make-violent-criminals-and-what-should-society-do/

                        Molecular Psychiatry (2014, October 28). Genetic Background of Extreme Violent Behavior. Retrieved February 07, 2016, from http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/v20/n6/full/mp2014130a.html

                        Hogenboom, M. (2014, October 28). Two genes linked with violent crime - BBC News. Retrieved February 07, 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-29760212

                         Gever, J. (2014, October 28). Genetic Factors Tied to Violent Behaviors. Retrieved February 07, 2016, from http://www.medpagetoday.com/Psychiatry/GeneralPsychiatry/48276?xid=nl_mpt_DHE_2014-10-29

Proompt Post Week Two (#7) Necessary and Unusual Punishment: The Pros and Cons of Animal Biological Tests

By Cameron O. 
   
            There are two sides to every story, especially when the public can feel so strongly about their opinions. When discussing the use of animal testing to find cures, test diseases, or look at effects of scientific studies there is a fine line between people who think it is worth testing on the animals before people, and the other side which believe that it is cruel punishment to bread animals to be tested on. Using animal-testing.procon.org I was able to have a clear set of reasons both sides view the topic so strongly. No matter what side you choose to be a part of it does not hurt to get educated on the matter.

Image Credits

                 The first thing I want to cover is the percentage and numbers behind how many animals are tested on. Every year more than one hundred million animals are tested on. To the left side of this page is a pie chart of the percentages behind that number to look more in depth at the individual animals in that bracket. The top three animals include mice, rats and fish that together make up a total of 86% of all animals tested on. Majority of the time these animals are born and raised to be tested on, a majority do die or have long lasting side effects cause from these tests.

Image Credits

          With these numbers in your face we might as well go over the three main reasons that animal testing is controversial starting with the cons of the topic. The main reasons why people are so strongly against animal testing include; "Animal testing is cruel and inhumane", "alternative testing methods now exist that can replace the need for animals", and finally "animals are very different from human beings and therefore make poor test subjects". These three reasons are very strong, we will start off from the top and work our way to the bottom. "Animal testing is cruel and inhumane", okay, well how can we see this? If you search up anything regarding animal testing, you are sure to find many images of all the pain and suffering that these animals have to go through so we can test out our treatments. Next up is “alternative testing methods now exist that can replace the need for animals”. Today, science has gone so far forward as to be able to conduct these same tests that use up animal lives by studying the same tests "in glass testing, such as studying cell cell cultures in a petri dish, [which] can produce more relevant results than animal testing because human cells can be used." Finally, "animals are very different from human beings and therefore make poor test subjects". This one I do not think I have to describe so much, When you look at the chart above, these animals are not human, they are nothing like us, so not all tests are able to pull results on these animals that they will later see in humans as well.

Image Credits

                Now switching to the three main pros of testing on animals which include; "Animal testing has contributed to many life-saving cures and treatments", "There is no adequate alternative to testing on a living, whole-body system", "Animals are appropriate research subjects because they are similar to human beings in many ways". Again we will look at these in a descending order. First up, "Animal testing has contributed to many life-saving cures and treatments". “The California Biomedical Research Association states that nearly every medical breakthrough in the last 100 years has resulted directly from research using animals.” These tests have saved hundreds of thousands of human lives throughout these 100 years. So without a doubt it shows that it isn’t for nothing. Second up is "There is no adequate alternative to testing on a living, whole-body system" which counters the cons by being summed up in just a sentence: “Studying cell cultures in a petri dish, while sometimes useful, does not provide the opportunity to study interrelated processes occurring in the central nervous system, endocrine system, and immune system”. The final topic we will discuss today is “Animals are appropriate research subjects because they are similar to human beings in many ways”. One of the main ways that they are similar is based on the fact that things like mice are 98% genetically similar to humans which is a fact that shows how important and accurate it can be to test mice.

               No matter what side you chose to stand on and fight for, you need to be aware of what exactly you are standing for. By visiting animal-testing.procon.org you can fully plunge into the controversial subject of animal testing and become more involved in the argument.

Are physical laws unchangeable forever ?

By Guangyao Q

After people learn physical laws, some of them may ask, "are physical laws unchangeable forever?" 

A physics law is a theoretical statement inferred from particular facts, applicable to a defined group or class of phenomenon always occurs if certain conditions be present. The physical laws are not considered as absolute right laws. By the further researching and deeper understanding, the physical laws will be updated in order to extend the scope of laws. But people only discover the extension law, people can not make a new physical law.

People only discover the extension law

The extension law is the law extend from the original physical laws. It is not a change. For example, the graph's x-axis can be time or space.  Y axis can be energy.

The understanding of the 1st version:

The 1st version's physical law

The understanding of the 2nd version:

The 2nd version's physical law

The understanding of the 3rd version:

The 3rd version's physical law

The understanding of the 4th version:

The 4th version's physical law

By increasing of number of the x-axis, people correct the forms of the "physics law" to make laws as same as the numbers, which are measured. Extend and correct the physics laws to approach the limit of truth is a long journey. People take time to discover new extension laws in order to extend the scope of laws and be perfect. In this way, physical laws are not unchangeable forever.

People can not make a new physical law

What is the actual situation of the example? People can be amazed.

The actual situation:

The physics law(God's input)

The physical laws of the nature will not change. They are always there and unchangeable forever. For instance, some physics constants are unchangeable, the speed of light in vacuum is always 300,000,000m/s. In this way, physical laws are unchangeable forever.

People can answer, "it depends." But I prefer to say the physical laws are unchangeable forever and not unchangeable forever. It is dualistic, which means something can have two statements at the same moment.

Thanks for your time.

Is Dolly the 'First' Clone?

By Mine G.

Since the genetics started playing an important role in terms of biological sciences, without a shadow of a doubt, cloning has become one of the most important studies in the 21^st century. But wait, did cloning exist in earlier centuries? Was the sheep Dolly the first step of cloning organisms?

Let’s start off discussing what “cloning” actually means. Cloning is a process of producing identical organisms asexually. Cloning, technically known as “somatic cell nuclear transfer”, happens by extracting DNA from a cell of an organism and inserting extracted DNA to an egg cell (the nucleus that carries genetic information of the egg cell is removed before the process) of another organism. After a while, the egg cell starts acting like a fertilized egg and developed into an embryo in a surrogate mother.

Now, since we know the process of cloning, let's get back to the first question. Did cloning really exist in earlier centuries? 
Well, even though it is thought the sheep Dolly (first mammal that is successfully cloned from an adult cell) was the beginning of the cloning studies by many people, cloning technologies have been the case for scientist for more than 50 years. In 1952, a frog was recorded as the first cloned organism. Robert Briggs and Thomas King created tedpole clones by using the cells in a tadpole embryo. To do that, they inserted the nucleus extracted from a tadpole's somatic cell into an unfertilized egg cell whose nucleus is removed. This method has become a prototype for the experiments for cloning multicellular organisms.

              This experiment is then followed by mice cloning attempts by James McGrath and Davor Solter, nuclear transfers from laboratory cells, and Dolly.

              In the 21^st century, cloning studies, for example human cloning, are still ongoing. Cloning is considered as one of the biggest technologies of all times. But still, there is a lot of questions waiting to be solved in this process. Have you ever thought, one day, you will be able to see 'baby you'?


                 Images: http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/cloning/clonezone/images/4-frog.jpg
          http://s.hswstatic.com/gif/cloning-sheep.gif

 References: Genetic Science Learning Center (2014, June 22) The History of Cloning. Learn.Genetics.                                                        Retrieved January 31, 2016, from   http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/cloning/clonezone                                       Harvard Medical School, B. (2015). Cloning. Retrieved January 31, 2016,                                                                                      from http://bsp.med.harvard.edu/node/17                                        BBC News. (1997, February 22). 1997: Dolly the sheep is cloned. Retrieved January 31, 2016, from                                        http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/february/22/newsid_4245000/4245877.stm

Black Holes

By Dan O

Black holes are points within space whose mass is so large and whose gravitational force is so strong, that they attract everything around them and once within their range of attraction, nothing can escape including light, because the escape velocity necessary to escape is infinite. There are many theories for why black holes exist, but Einstein's is most likely the most famous theory of black holes.

Image Credit: http://www.americaspace.com/

Einstein's theory was that the space time continuum was a flat plane of existence with masses representing indents within the flat plane. However, a black hole does not represent an indent, but a puncture within a space-time continuum, giving a representation of infinite gravity.

Stephen Hawking gives a good lecture on how black holes work.

http://www.iflscience.com/physics/retro-animation-stephen-hawkins-explains-black-holes-under-2-minutes

Within the video, Stephen Hawking references the infinite gravity of the black hole, and the idea that particles can escape. The difference within these particles and its ability to escape is because only one particle passes the singularity, or the point of no return, while the other particle has enough momentum and velocity in order to escape the black hole and be emitted as a form of radiation.

Image Credit: http://www.lifeintherightdirection.com/

Hawking also touches briefly on falling within to a black hole and encountering a new universe. This references the theory within quantum physics that there are an infinite amount of universes parallel to ours in both minute ways and large ways as well, depending on the decisions that we take. There is no clear answer about where black holes lead to, but one theory is that, if one was able to survive the journey, which is very low to none, it would take the observer to a new universe separate from our own, ejecting them from what is known as a "white hole."

The math behind "Sights"

By Guangyao Q

If a person jumps from the high building, taking a sight, and finishes uploading sight by using WeChat, what will the height of the building it requires? (WeChat Sight is the new, fun way to shoot and share your world through six second videos. Share your experiences with friends and family via chats or Moments.)

Since WeChat is a part of Chinese's daily lives, I am willing to use the knowledge of physics, which I already learned, to satisfy people's curiosities.

WeChat Sight usually lasts six second, and I assume it takes one more second to upload online. There are seven seconds in all. Using the formula of gravity, which is s = 1/2 *g*t^2, I can get s ＝ 1/2 ＊ 9.8 ＊ 7 ＊ 7 ＝ 240.1m. The height of one floor is around 4 meters. It means the building only needed to be 60 floors. People can find such a building easily.

Is 60-floor building the final answer? No, it is not. Do not ignore the air friction! In fact, the higher speed suffers larger air-friction. Using google, I was able to find the formula:



Force(Drag)= .5(density)(Velocity)^2(Constant of Drag)(Surface Area)

87.16(squareroot(0.6))(tanh(time*(0.11/(sqrt(0.6))))

Velocity(of time)=square root(2*mass*gravity constant/(density*surface area*Drag constant))*tanh(time*(square root(gravity*density*Drag Constant*Surface Area/(2*Mass))

drag equation

When velocity starts from zero, ρ is the density of the fluid(yeah, air is a kind of fluid); Cd is drag coefficient, and A is cross sectional area. Set the formula as:



People can be assumed as a sphere, which has 0.6 diameter and cd is 1.0, when people are dropping down. The density(ρ) of a human is quite similar as the density of water. Using the normal density of air and simplify it, I got the new function:

Wolfram can graph the function that is shown above. The cute graph, which is about jumping from a building, is shown below:

By decreasing the acceleration, the speed becomes stable around 65 m/s. Take the integral of the function.

Finally, plugging 7s into the function, I got the distance is 204 meters, which are around 51 floors.

Compare with the previous calculation, the difference is more than 36 meters! Do not need to climb another 9 floors. I should thank for my calculation.

This calculation is important because it proves one truth again. Physics is completely versatile.

Thanks for your time.

Lets Talk About Delivery

     By Cameron O.    

               I am sure that you and I alike have all been to some sort of medical building to receive simple things such as blood-work tests, physicals, flu-shots and some of us may have visited our local medical department for things such as drug tests and Sexually Transmitted Disease tests.

               A recent article, published on Wednesday, November 11th by Martin Lambert to "Mediplacements.com", took a study of was how today's patients prefer to receive the data and results of the tests listed earlier. This article was not very long but included results that every medical field should take note of.

               The study viewed how patients want to see and maybe even discus the results of everyday common tests, as well as tests that may be more personal such as cancer reports, STD topics and other similar tests. As you may expect, the average person has become more involved in technology compared to previous generations. Patients were more than happy for their own convenience to receive these results regarding simple tests in emails or even text messages from their doctors. This information was not surprising to myself as I have gotten some blood-work done to test for Diabetes, a condition found through many generations of my family that restricts our bodies from producing incline, and did not even get the results back from the doctor since the result was negative. I have also had physicals done with results being text messaged to myself. I see that the convenience for this method of information is quick and easy for both the patient and the medical office.

               On the other hand, when discussing more serious topics and tests the study had shown that patients would rather have the results given to them in person, face to face, or through password protected online sites. Again, this made clear sense to me. I can tell that these people would not want to receive a message on their phone saying "Hello, this is Doctor So-and-So letting you know that you do in fact have cancer". Even though the patients said that they prefer these things, after information was posted onto the sites, records show that many accounts never accessed the information containing their results.

Photo Credits

              This is important within the field of bio-medical science because it is important to pay high levels of attention to making sure that your information, studies, and tests are as accurate as possible, but also respect the patient themselves and make sure that how you deliver the information can make a world of a difference to their lives as well as the actual results. Quoted on "Mediplacements.com", "Jeannine LaRocque, professor of human science at the university and lead author of the study, explained: "Communication with patients may need to be on a case-by-case basis - every individual may have a personal preference and there may be a way to indicate those preferences in the patient's record. The goal of this study was to try to better understand these preferences so we can improve doctor-patient communication."