Category: Archive

Categories
Archive Leonie Schittenhelm

Bright Club: how to see the humour in academia

By Leonie Schittenhelm

Sweaty hands. Knees buckling. An acute desire to run to the toilet, lock myself in a stall and not come out for the rest of the night. And those weren’t even all the signs of acute nervousness I felt minutes before going onto the stage to perform my first Bright Club set. Let’s pretend you are me, roughly a year ago, which is incidentally the amount of time it took me to take up all my courage and convince myself to actually do this. You might ask yourself questions such as: ‘What is a Bright Club?’ and ‘Why does it freak this poor person out so much?’. Easy enough to answer: Bright Club, often also dubbed the ‘thinking person’s variety night’, is a comedy night about science and everything academia. The clue is in the name, and that’s where my nervousness comes back in: the people on the stage, telling the jokes? That’s academics, who for one night only exchange their pipette for a microphone or their lecture theatre for a comedy club to tell some jokes about their work. And that night, it was my turn.

Let’s rewind a bit. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy a good laugh just as much as the next person. But to actually get up on a stage and talk about things you thought were funny when you wrote them up at home? That seemed just completely inconceivable to me. I mean, how do you even find things that are funny about your work? Being a PhD student in my first year, the only way I could keep my impostor syndrome in check was by appearing as serious about my area of interest as possible. To make matters worse, in the weeks preceding Bright Club, my science just flat-out refused to work, full-stop. Suffice to say, I was not in a very good place to see the humour in my daily work. So when Elin Roberts and Marilena Pace at the Centre for Life sent us home to ‘just write down some ideas for your set’, I was stumped. Where should I even begin to look? But as I got on with experiments and meetings, my work started to transform in front of my eyes. Surely not everyone has conversations about blood in the lunch room? And am I the only one that kind of treats their cell cultures like pets to be nurtured and loved?

I think there are a lot of good reasons to do Bright Club. The relief you feel when the audience laughs at your first joke. The growing exhilaration after the second laugh, and every laugh thereafter. The boost in confidence after doing something that you never thought yourself capable of. The amazing support from the Centre for Life, which will take you by the hand to write your first comedy set and practice it with you until you are ready to shine. But for me personally, the ability to see the humour in my work has been the best and most long-lasting effect of doing Bright Club. Everyone knows PhDs are hard, but everything gets that much easier if you can have a good laugh about it.

Interested in taking part in the next Bright Club event on the 3rd of October at the Stand Comedy Club in Newcastle? Contact marilena.pace@life.org.uk fore more information and all the important dates for your diary.

Categories
Archive Emma Kampouraki

In the era of pharmacogenetics

By Emma Kampouraki

Differences in the genetic material we carry make us who we are. Individual variability is important when prescribing drugs, as we can now genotype a person in less than a few hours. We can then use this information to inform drug prescription. Genotype-informed prescription is more than virtual reality nowadays. Both FDA (US Food and Drug Administration) and EMA (European Medicines Agency) recommend the use of genetic information to drive the decision of treatment and prevent patients from serious mistakes in the prescription of “useless” drugs. Although ethical concerns don’t facilitate the establishment of genotyping in clinical practice, it is common sense that it is also unethical not to use all the existing data for a more informed and safe process of drug therapy. Trial and error is still in place in most drug schemes, however moving on to a more individualised approach has the advantages of costing less and resulting in more effective treatments, increasing patient satisfaction and compliance at the same time.

The first FDA-approved genetically-guided therapy was for the treatment of HER2 (human epidermal growth factor) positive metastatic breast cancers in 1998. The case of trastuzumab (Herceptin®) paved the way for the co-development of gene-based therapies with tests to detect the drug targets, in order to identify the right therapies for the right patients. Simultaneously with the approval of trastuzumab, a laboratory technique for detection of HER2 protein overexpression in breast cancer cells (Dako North America, Inc. for HercepTest).

Later, the cases of olaparib (Lynparza®) and rucaparib (Rubraca®) prove the increasing need for more targeted therapies and the outstanding interest of medicines regulatory agencies to cover this need as soon as possible. Recent findings show that tumours rely on poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP)-mediated DNA repair for their survival. Both olaparib and rucaparib are inhibitors of the PARP enzymes responsible for DNA damage repair. In 2014, olaparib was the first drug in its category to be approved for ovarian cancer with mutations in BRCA gene, with only mild to moderate adverse effects to date. In fact, the clinical trial data that convinced the EMA in 2014 for the efficacy of olaparib were not as convincing for the FDA for various reasons. A few months later, olaparib was granted approval in the US. Further testing on humans confirmed the increased progression-free survival for patients with BRCA mutations on olaparib. Two years later, in 2016, rucaparib became the second drug with accelerated approval for treatment of patients with BRCA mutations. In addition, the need for a reliable genetic test to identify patients eligible to receive the treatment was also covered by the FDA. The FoundationFocus CDxBRCA test is the first FDA-approved next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based companion diagnostic, which detects alterations in BRCA genes in the tumour tissue of ovarian cancer patients.

Between the two decades of cancer treatment genotype-based approvals, the first oral anticoagulant warfarin, used for the prevention and treatment of strokes, thrombosis and atrial fibrillation among others, was shown to be influenced by genetic variation, as well. Genetic testing prior to prescription along with genotype-guided dosing of warfarin was recommended, changing the way we perceive drug dosing. Warfarin is one of the most commonly prescribed drugs, with more than 2 million people are treated with warfarin every year in the US, hence the importance of such advancement is great, as it affects the clinical management of millions of people worldwide.

The list of drugs that receive approval and are specifically designed for variant genotypic characteristics is fast growing. It is our responsibility to educate health professionals and most of all patients. Now, more than ever, we need to find the best way to use and protect genetic information, while at the same time proving its power to change clinical practice forever.

Categories
Archive Leonie Schittenhelm

Text before you drink? – how mobile phones could help reduce binge drinking

By Leonie Schittenhelm

Everyone’s had those good intentions – that fitness app just after new years, this meditation app that the colleague that always seems like she has it all together recommended. The first few days go well, but then – well, let’s say the reminders keep popping up, without causing much more action than the thumb swipe that dismisses them. So how could text message-based intervention help people who have problems with binge-drinking? That is just what a collaborative study between Dundee, Glasgow, Edinburgh and Newcastle wants to find out.

Over 12 weeks they sent over 100 text messages to each study participant – the clue: instead of merely reminding them to drink less, they were designed to foster interaction and response. Questions such as ‘Can you think of any reasons why it might be a good idea to cut down a bit on your drinking?’ were interspersed with real quotes from pilot study participants (Mark from Edinburgh says: “Sometimes I’ve not had enough money to pay the bills.”) and challenges to identify achievable goals to reduce alcohol intake, if even just a little bit.

Responses ranged from humourous (On the question who would be pleased to see them drink less: “My wife, she’d get more money for shoes!!”) over heart-breaking (on the question, if they or their friends had experienced problems due to drinking: “I’ve had a friend that’s died because of drink. Fell off a balcony in a block of flats.”) to aspirational (“Stop earlier in the evening or at the very least slow down compared to others.”). While the researchers including Dr. Falko F. Sniehotta from Newcastle University, still note some caveats of the study, the success of actively engaging individuals in a text-based intervention programme instead of passively informing them speaks for itself. Answering one of the last messages one participant writes: “Had my ups and downs but I’m getting there now. Enjoyed the experience, thank you.”

If you want to have a look at the study yourself: Irvine, Linda, et al. (2017) “Real time monitoring of engagement with a text message intervention to reduce binge drinking among men living in socially disadvantaged areas of Scotland.”

Categories
Archive Philippa Rickard

Eyes to the skies

By Philippa Rickard

I don’t need to tell you about the sheer volume of rain falling from the sky recently, but have you seen the meteors? Every year, over July and August, we pass through debris from the tail of Comet Swift-Tuttle; we know this debris as the Perseid meteoroids. Most are as small as a grain of sand but some are as big as a marble, and all are travelling up to 133,000 miles per hour (that’s 37 miles per second!). They light up our skies when they are about 60 miles from the ground, as they burn up in the Earth’s atmosphere as meteors.

Swift-Tuttle is composed of ice and rock with an orbital period of 133 Earth years. Its diameter of 26 km and mass of 7,500,000,000,000,000 kg make it the largest comet to periodically orbit Earth. The last time we could see Swift-Tuttle pass by Earth with our naked eye was 1992 and the next time will be in 2126.

The 2017 Perseid meteor shower will reach its peak this coming weekend. The normal rate for this shower is 80-100 meteors per hour, but this year NASA are predicting enhanced rates of about 150 meteors per hour. That’s a few meteors per minute. Unfortunately, the fainter Perseids will be outshined by the bright light of the waning gibbous moon. But don’t despair! If you can see stars in the sky then you will see meteors.

It is certainly worth heading out to catch a glimpse of this annual phenomenon, and you will have a better chance of seeing more meteors away from artificial light. We are incredibly lucky in Newcastle, we have Europe’s largest area of protected night sky on our doorstep, Northumberland International Dark Sky Park. The shower will peak during the pre-dawn hours of 12th August, but there will be a decent show over both Friday and Saturday nights. Perseids appear to radiate out of the Perseus constellation, but you don’t need any special equipment or knowledge of the stars. Just look north-east and be patient (and maybe take along a cosy blanket, a reclining chair and a flask of tea).

Categories
Archive Justin Byrne

United in Science

By Justin Byrne

Currently the School of Natural and Environmental Sciences is assimilating what was my school – the School of Biology. Changes will come with the new super school, but hopefully along with increased opportunities for collaboration. It may seem perfectly natural to bring together related schools into a single body, but each discipline uses different equipment, jargon, methods, analyses, and philosophical approaches. Reconciling these differences presents a challenge and I wonder whether it is something that is either possible or desirable. Concerns of this nature are central to the philosophy of science, relating to the concept of the unity of science, and have their roots in the very beginnings of western thought. Now seems like the perfect time to explore unification as a concept and perceived scientific ideal.

“Knowledge also is surely one, but each part of it that commands a certain field is marked off and given a special name proper to itself.” – Plato, Sophist, 257c.

Even before Plato expressed this, the idea of a unified theory of knowledge was discussed and revered. This ideal was passed on by great thinkers, such as Wilhem Dilthey, who first introduced distinctions between the natural and social sciences, building himself upon work by Kant. It is in this way (container unity) that we now tend to approach natural science as a unified concept, separate to social and cultural studies and distinct from pseudoscience and religion. However the age and tenacity of these ideas does not guarantee their validity. Indeed, certain pluralistic views of science would argue against this “one”-ness, rejecting the view of science as a collection of related disciplines that together strive towards a single, correct understanding of nature. This kind of unification of disciplines within science is referred to as connective unity. Pluralists might argue that the differences between certain disciplines in thought, vision, or method, are sometimes irreconcilable. As such, they must be viewed and treated as separate projects, perhaps with similar themes.

All of this is to say that, when bringing the schools together, difficulties of integration should be expected. How we view the concept of unity in science will affect how we attempt to solve potential problems. One scientist (whether they know it or not) may be a reductionist, perhaps believing in a pyramid of knowledge built up from the foundation of physics and mathematics, with each subsequent level reducible to concepts of the previous. When disagreements arise between fields they might be inclined to side with the more fundamental or “hard” science. Reductionism attempts to unify disciplines along lineages, where more fundamental disciplines underlie the principles of the others, but this is not without criticism.

Within the scientific community there is broad acceptance of the unity of science. It underlies scientific principles of hypothesis formation, falsifiability (as an improvement over verifiability), and empirical evidence. However its critics have described it as overly dogmatic, restrictive, and ultimately unrealistic in describing the chaotic history of how theories have emerged and reached acceptance. Scientists work on a variety of tasks that go beyond basic empirical methods, such as collaboration with artists and media outlets, discussions with other scientists, and interdisciplinary work outside of the natural sciences. A narrow definition of science that ignores the way modern science is conducted is not useful, and may mean that the separation between the natural sciences and other disciplines is exaggerated.

Whether the sciences are distinct or not, we still need to resolve differences within our new school. I am predisposed to a live and let live attitude. Believers in the concept of emergence in science might argue that in increasingly complex subjects, new concepts, tools, rules and principles form that are irreducible, and cannot be deduced from more “fundamental” studies. Due to my own interest in complex systems and dynamic networks, I must admit that I am personally inclined to this view. As the research areas within the new school touch upon social, economic, biological, and political research, this incredible complexity may require a more sophisticated approach.

Finally, Otto Neurath once imagined science as an old boat at sea, undergoing constant repair without a stable foundation. The workers constantly reconstruct it with the best available components, reusing some and discarding others. In doing so he was rejecting the primacy of physics as the foundation of science, instead arguing for a united effort, allied for practical reasons. Cooperative, separate efforts, all attempting to produce good predictions and enable control of the natural world requires the sharing of tools and ideas. Unity in science was a tool for cooperation in his post-war landscape with cultural, political, and economic ramifications. Though I am inclined to disagree with those who would unify natural sciences by reducing its many principles to expressions of physics and chemistry, I find this kind of unity compelling. As we move forward and shape our new school Neurath’s views on the unity of science are perhaps the most important; how can we work together to produce a more peaceful, cooperative and prosperous future.

Categories
Archive Justin Byrne

What does a healthy community look like?

By Justin Byrne

My PhD focuses on the use of ecological networks (like food webs) to study biological communities, so I spend a lot of time thinking about what a “healthy” community might look like. Perhaps spending too much time thinking about one topic leads you to try and apply that thinking to everything else. Let me give you an example.

To study the microbial communities I will focus on, I have had to educate myself on a developing field in biology that may offer an alternative way to identify species: DNA barcodes. This method allows us to identify organisms based upon a small snippet of their DNA that is unique (more or less) to that species. Specifically, I will be working with large numbers of species, mixing all their DNA together and extracting all the “barcodes” at once. Using the wonders of new DNA sequencing technology, I will then be able to read all of these short DNA sequences and produce a list of everything present. This complicated process is called “DNA metabarcoding”.

If that all sounds complicated, that’s how I felt too. Especially for an ecologist who spent the last year looking at birds and running computer models. While learning about this, I have been surprised by the number of researchers at Newcastle who are using DNA barcoding. Some have been using these methods to look at historical trends in species DNA (a field called paleoecology) to verify archaeological farming records. Others, myself included, have been investigating questions of conservation and ecology. Across the university, researchers are being pulled together due to common interests and are discussing collaborative efforts. This is all an essential part of the academic process, perhaps these links between researchers are an indicator of community health?

My research will look at characterising the fungi and bacteria present in various woodland soils. I’d like to add to our understanding of ancient woodland soil communities. As the project involves fieldwork with woodland soil, lab work with DNA and computer analysis of large amounts of data, it helps to be part of a broad research community that can offer guidance on multiple issues. Both community health research and healthy research communities are important at Newcastle, which is a good sign. What’s not a good sign is that I seem to have taken to simplifying every aspect of my life to network representations of real things. Send help, preferably in the form of Eigen vectors that transform me out of this state.

Categories
Archive Philippa Rickard

The Natural Health Service

By Philippa Rickard

Urban experiences dominate our lives, with 90% of us in the UK living in cities (1). Meanwhile, the gap between us and nature widens (2). Unsurprisingly, the perception of being disconnected from each other, ourselves and our environment has resulted in poor mental and physical health (3).

Nature is filled with stimuli that involuntarily and discretely grab our attention, which provides restoration from mental tiredness (4,5). Urban environments are less restorative, because they are filled with stimuli that dramatically grab and require additional attention, like hazards such as moving vehicles (4). Think about how different it feels strolling along a countryside path to negotiating a busy street.

The benefits of a view of nature from a window have long been known and have been seen to help recovering surgery patients (6), but why is this? It can be explained from an evolutionary perspective (7), the Biophilic (attraction to nature) hypothesis (8). Due to our evolution in natural environments (7) we have an affinity with nature, not with built settings (9). We respond positively to places that would have been favourable for the survival of our ancestors (10). This positive emotion is not only an indicator of good mental health, it actually produces it (11).

For many of us our only contact with nature is through urban green spaces, such as parks (12). These spaces provide benefits such as longer life expectancy and a decreased risk of mental illness (6,13). Exercise in the presence of nature, or green exercise, is unsurprisingly more beneficial than exercise in built settings (11). Green exercise has been shown to improve self-esteem and mood (indicators of mental health and protectors against long-term physical health threats) (14). GPs have even been recommended to consider green exercise as a treatment option for anyone suffering mental distress (15).

Interacting with nature is a therapy that is readily available to us, has no unpleasant side effects and can improve our mental and physical wellbeing at zero cost4. Looking out over nature from your window or spending 5-minutes in your local park can make your day better, increase your confidence and lift your mood. Nature provides an important health service, use it.

References

  1. Dallimer, M., Irvine, K. N., Skinner, A. M. J., Davies, Z. G., Rouquette, J. R., Maltby, L. L., Warren, P. H., Armsworth, P. R., and Gaston, K. J. (2012) Biodiversity and the Feel-Good Factor: Understanding Associations between Self-Reported Human Well-being and Species Richness, BioScience, 62:1, 47–55.

  2. James R. Miller, J. R. (2005) Biodiversity conservation and the extinction of experience, Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 20:8, 430 – 434.

  3. Nurse, J., Basher, D., Bone, A. and Bird, W. (2010) An ecological approach to promoting population mental health and well-being − A response to the challenge of climate change, Perspectives in Public Health, 130:1, 27 – 33.

  4. Berman, M.G., Jonides, J., Kaplan, S., (2008) The cognitive benefits of interacting with nature, Psychological Science, 19:12, 1207 – 1212.

  5. Roe, J. and Aspinall, P. (2011) The restorative benefits of walking in urban and rural settings in adults with good and poor mental health, Health & Place, 17,103 – 113.

  6. Ulrich, R. S. (1984) View through a window may influence recovery from surgery, Science, 224, 420 – 421.

  7. van den Berg, A. E., Maas, J., Verheij, R. A. and Groenewegen, P. P. (2010) Green space as a buffer between stressful life events and health, Social Science and Medicine, 70, 1203 – 1210.

  8. O’Brien, L. and Murray, R. (2007) Forest School and its impacts on young children: Case studies in Britain, Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 6, 249 – 265.

  9. Ulrich, R. S. (1993) Biophilia, biophobia and natural landscapes. In: Kellert, S. R. and Wilson, E. O. (eds.) The Biophilia hypothesis, 75 – 137. Washington DC: Island Press.

  10. Kellert, S. R., and Wilson, E. O. (1993) The biophilia hypothesis, Washington DC: Island Press.

  11. Roe, J. and Aspinall, P. (2011) The restorative benefits of walking in urban and rural settings in adults with good and poor mental health, Health & Place, 17, 103 – 113.

  12. Dallimer, M., Irvine, K. N., Skinner, A. M. J., Davies, Z. G., Rouquette, J. R., Maltby, L. L., Warren, P. H., Armsworth, P. R., and Gaston, K. J. (2012) Biodiversity and the Feel-Good Factor: Understanding Associations between Self-Reported Human Well-being and Species Richness, BioScience, 62:1, 47–55.

  13. Wipfli, B., Landers, D., Nagoshi, C. and Ringenbach, S. (2011) An examination of serotonin and psychological variables in the relationship between exercise and mental health, Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 21, 474 – 481.

  14. Wells, N. M., Evans, G. W., (2003) Nearby nature: a buffer of life stress among rural children, Environment and Behavior 35, 311–330.

  15. Mind (2007) Ecotherapy The green agenda for mental health, Mind week Report.

Categories
Archive

Call for articles

Categories
Archive Riona McArdle

Beautiful brains: Pint of Science

By Riona McArdle

This year I was invited to give a talk for the Beautiful Brains session of Pint of Science in Durham. What did I gain from this experience? Quite a bit actually.

Firstly, it gave me an opportunity to present my research (gait analysis in dementia) to an audience who were interested in science and the brain generally, but were not specialised researchers or even scientists! This meant that I had to adapt my language so that they could grasp difficult concepts that may be totally foreign to them. That in itself is a learning experience! Like Einstein said, “If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough”. It also meant I got direct feedback from the audience, which allowed me to assess how people outside of my research bubble viewed my research – do they think it is worthwhile? Luckily, I had quite a positive experience with this!

Secondly, the type of questions one receives at POS are a little different to questions you might be asked at a conference in your specialist field. They can be simple, but they can also address the bigger picture – something you might forget about when you are so wrapped up in your rabbit hole of scientific expertise. This means you have got to think outside the box which is always beneficial in science!

Lastly, POS is in general a lovely experience. It’s relaxed, its informative, its an opportunity to showcase your passion for your research and science. In my case, the organisers were fabulous and so enthusiastic. The audience thoroughly engaged, the other speakers gave fascinating overviews of their research. So if you are a researcher, I urge you to take part in POS; either as an audience member or a speaker. You won’t regret it!

Categories
Archive Emma Kampouraki

How genes run and ruin our lives: Pint of Science

By Emma Kampouraki

Obesity, dwarfism and intellectual disability. Can you guess what they have in common? I couldn’t either before the 17th May when “pint of science” brought all three topics in one evening and explained “how genes run and ruin our lives”. Three local scientists, mainly PhD students, gave three wonderful presentations explaining the interaction between genetics and environment in the context of various diseases. Diseases we still struggle to fight in the 21st century.

Obesity, a modern pandemic, is the result of multiple factors such as exercise, quality of mitochondria, DNA mutations in mitochondria, nuclear DNA mutations and diet. Various myths around obesity and weight loss were refuted, starting from calorie-restricted diets that stress the cells and end up in the accumulation of fat instead of weight loss. Mitochondria are the energy-producing organelles of our cells. We inherit our mother’s mitochondria and therefore any mutations she carries are very likely to be passed on to the offspring. This is the idea behind three-parent babies, so that mitochondrial dysfunctions, such as the ones causing obesity, are not passed on to the next generations. Another factor is the problematic communication between nuclear and mitochondrial DNA that collaborate for the production of energy. Finally, exercise is important to maintain energy balance but is not enough to compensate for the genetic predisposition that obese people might have.

The second talk was related to people with deformities, such as hip dysplasia and osteoarthritis caused by dwarfism. The latter is a very rare disease and it‘s hard to study in humans therefore scientists use mice. Two mutations are responsible for funny-shaped proteins, stressed cells and skeletal abnormalities, however the main observation is their difference in autophagy activity. Autophagy is the mechanism for controlled cell death when the cells cannot get rid of defective proteins. This study is ongoing at the moment, but it helped us gain some insight in mechanisms that are involved in many physiological functions and when disrupted they have detrimental effects on development.

At the end, the almost exclusively female audience really enjoyed the talk titled “Should we mate with old men?”. In this talk, we explored the importance of age of both men and women in reproduction. The prevalence of Down syndrome increases exponentially when the mother is older than 45-50 years old. However, paternal age is also a risk factor for intellectual disability, with men passing one more mutation for every year older (i.e. 40 mutations at the age of 40). Freezing sperm is popular in the media nowadays, but we are not there yet. It is unknown why the consequence of mating with old men is intellectual disability, but it is possibly because brain function depends on numerous genes therefore there is a higher chance that it will be affected.

As you may have realised already, “pint of science” is an annual celebration of scientific development, with scientists organising informative sessions that aim to give the public a better understanding of the human body and resolve its mysteries with evidence. Join us next year to find more about the wonderful world of science!