Absence of a ‘smoking gun’ pathogen has stymied efforts to solve AFM mystery illness paralyzing children

Patient with Enterovirus via screencap x
It’s been more than four years since I did work investigating the association between the frightening cases of polio-like acute flaccid myelitis (AFM) affecting children and a variety of different potential causative agents (viruses, bacteria, etc.). We still don’t know what’s going on, but we also haven’t definitively ruled out enterovirus D68. Other potential causal factors investigated have included coxsackievirus A16, enterovirus A71, and many others. We do know, for example, that enterovirus A71, poliovirus, and West Nile Virus can all be associated with acute flaccid myelitis.

What’s been so frustrating and elusive in the hunt is that, despite extensive and complex testing of cerebrospinal fluid of patients in some cases, there doesn’t appear to be one single recurring type of pathogen that could be considered the smoking gun. In fact, in some patients, there are no detectable pathogenic agents at all. It’s also sometimes difficult to accurately differentiate AFM cases from other neurologic diseases, such as Guillain-Barre syndrome and transverse myelitis.

One of the most promising, albeit subjective, hypotheses we’ve been testing has been the reported presence of an upper respiratory infection preceding acute flaccid myelitis symptoms. In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) roughly characterize that ~90% of AFM symptom cases have followed a respiratory illness or fever.

The architecture of seasonality in infection

To help you build your understanding of what’s going on, as well as what we’re seeing in the data, check out this time-series plot of the incidence of AFM cases by month (though in all fairness, it should be represented as a line plot, not a bar chart):

afm cases reported

Before you prematurely jump onto the bandwagon of those who think they’ve ‘solved it’ based on what you’re seeing above, realize that there’s much more that goes on in interpreting these data properly. Factors include misdiagnoses, lack of reporting, super-reporting (out of fear, etc.), increased sensitivity of healthcare providers and ‘looking’ harder, etc.

As we continue to probe more deeply, we learn a lot more day by day. We only hope that the rapidity of our answers can help prevent future cases.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

Following below is what I wrote back in 2014 following news reports and discussions of causality:

As cases continue to build in the Midwest of respiratory illness and other cold-like symptoms it’s important to realize that we are constantly facing immunologic threats every day.

Newsworthy ‘spikes’ in illness cases don’t necessarily mean we have limited knowledge of what is causing the illness or what the appropriate care should be. In fact, from the Missouri Department of Public Health & Senior Services, we have the following statement:

Missouri Department of Health & Senior Services: Health Alert

August 29, 2014

FROM: GAIL VASTERLING, DIRECTOR

SUBJECT: Respiratory Illnesses Due to Enterovirus D68 (EV-D68) in Missouri

Current Situation: Recently, a pediatric hospital in Kansas City, Missouri has experienced over 300 cases of respiratory illnesses in their facility. Approximately 15 percent of those illnesses have resulted in children being placed in an intensive care unit. Testing of specimens from several cases at a specialized laboratory at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicated that 19 of the 22 specimens were positive for Enterovirus D68 (EV-D68). The St. Louis area is also experiencing a recent increase in pediatric respiratory illnesses. Many specimens from those cases have tested positive for enterovirus, and further testing for specific virus type is pending. To date, no deaths have been reported due to EV-68 in Missouri.

As there is genetic shift and/or drift in viral specimens, and as certain illnesses occur in transient patterns and clusters, it should be made clear that clinical appearance of this enterovirus subgroup HEV-68 is not new, and in fact has been noted that “HEV-68 may play a predominant role among the enteroviruses associated with [acute respiratory tract infection] in children.”

model of enterovirus
model of enterovirus

Additionally, The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) observed three years ago, “Clinicians should be aware of HEV68 as one of many causes of viral respiratory disease and should report clusters of unexplained respiratory illness to the appropriate public health agency.” Worryingly of course, as seasonal cases of respiratory illnesses begin to increase, pithy diagnoses of HEV-68 will undoubtedly be made without the appropriate viral speciation and serotyping (there are a variety of immunological, biological, and molecular typing methods available). Appropriately done, it can be diagnosed by reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing along with analyzing a certain few structural protein genes. This is the only way to accurately measure effect incidences and from there, impute epidemiologic vectors. Measured simply by clinical symptoms and not viral typing, it is very difficult to impossible to separate HEV-68 from human rhinovirus (HRV), with which HEV-68 shares epidemiologic characteristics.

Considering that the symptoms of this enterovirus are much like the common cold, mostly caused by

model of rhinovirus
model of rhinovirus

a rhinovirus, some hospitals and physicians are suggesting patients not visit for care if they have respiratory symptoms. “Symptoms include a high fever, trouble breathing, and a rattling couch [sic]. A hospital in Quincy, IL has seen 70 children with what appears to be this same virus. The children came in over the holiday weekend. Reuters notes that, for the time being, children under the age of 12 have been asked to stay away from Blessing Hospital in Quincy.”

It’s not likely in the near future to have a viable immunization for enterovirus, given that there are so many subgroups and serotypes, and similarly, there are an incredible array of human rhinovirus serotypes. Couple this with the fact that the replication fidelity of enterovirus is so poor (meaning that the genetic combination is quite error-prone, leading toward more mutations), and they become a moving target. The CDC continues to investigate the pathogen and the spread of it, but much of the treatment will be symptomatic—supportive care during the illness.

So far the obvious and visible vector are the many children admitted for hospital care in the Midwest; activities such as disinfecting frequently-touched surfaces are relatively ineffective, given that one-touch later, they are re-contaminated. Hand washing and avoiding touching one’s face can limit the spread of the illness, but at the same time, hand washing vigilance and ‘touch-discipline’ are unpredictable in younger children.

Ben Locwin is a behavioral neuroscientist and astrophysicist with a masters in business, and a researcher on the genetics of human disease. BIO. Follow him on Twitter @BenLocwin

10 GMO memes backed up by science

meme optimized

For years the anti-GMO machine has been churning out propaganda featuring scary scientists injecting tomatoes with needles full of water and food coloring. But something happened several years ago, scientists and science enthusiasts began fighting back. The rise of social media has allowed them to share their love of science, and hope for the future, with the masses. Here are some of my favorite examples:

1.

QiRd wU bxQvLDftRNTNiA
Credit: Chuck Lasker

This is one of the first I came across. I can’t remember if someone sent it to me after I started We Love GMOs and Vaccines because Chuck was thinking the same thing, or if it helped inspire the page name. Either way it sums up our point. Both movements oppose biotechnology and are selling the idea that “natural” is better and anything made by corporations is automatically evil.

2.

gmo corn meme b
Credit: Ryan Megan

This is another that has been floating around social media for a few years. On the left is teosinte, the genetic ancestor to modern corn. Those fearful of biotechnology will often claim that artificial selection is natural but genetic engineering is not. But it depends on your definition of “natural”. Artificial selection involves humans selecting traits that are beneficial to humans, not ones that are beneficial to the organism’s survival in the wild. Corn would never have evolved without man’s intervention, there is nothing natural about it. On the other hand, recently researchers have discovered that bacterium transfer naturally contributed to the creation of the sweet potato.

Does that mean genetic engineering using that technique is even more natural?

3.

alv LtKjqnu TpVXqg NQ
Credit: Art Canfill

Golden rice has been the poster child for the pro-GMO community long before I came on the scene. With technology donated by Syngenta for this public project, the hope has been to use a staple diet (rice) in developing countries to prevent blindness caused by vitamin A deficiency. Greenpeace has been waging war on it since the 1990s when they had an undercover operative working on the project leak details that allowed them to steal the seeds while in transit. Since then they have a nasty habit of destroying field trials, and then screaming about not enough testing. If a project like golden rice is allowed to succeed the anti-gmo movement would lose their biggest talking point, “corporations”.

4.

uNrNrhCksfc qyHxRNbrtQ

The infamous, and retracted, Seralini study was retracted for a reason. This sums it all up beautifully. It was later republished without peer review, and Seralini recently won a case in France because a journalist there said he was an intentional liar. Something the first amendment in the United States gives me the right to do.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

5.

fVmfyxS H uwwlyVrcSNg
Credit: Casey Miller

Anti-GMO crusaders think Monsanto is so powerful that it owns everything and everyone. From supreme court justices to Hillary Clinton’s campaign, they see Monsanto everywhere. For the record Clarence Thomas worked there for only a couple of years in the late 1970s, and he hated it so much he went running to the public sector. Clinton’s campaign, as revealed by Wikileaks, actually had close ties to the organic movement. Gary Hirschberg, Stonyfield exec and founder of Just Label It, was quite influential with her attempt to move back in to the White House.

6.

aB V vk nmpa WaE Pg GQ
Credit: Kevin Folta

This demonstrates how products produced (or partially produced) with genetic engineering are substantially equivalent to the conventional versions. Sugar doesn’t even contain DNA by the time all of the processing is done to make it. Why demonize family farmers in the north who are only growing sugar beets because this technology makes it economically possible when you have the cane sugar barons in the south destroying the Everglades?

7.

PnSfmr AH jiuaG kv Btw
Credit: Kevin Folta

Once again Professor Folta is able to so eloquently demonstrate the hypocrisy of the anti-GMO movement. In the 1970s and into the 1980s anti-GMO leaders like Sheldon Krimsky did indeed speak out against making insulin from GE bacteria, and activists in Germany forced a production facility to close. But that fear seems to have subsided in favor of scaring people about herbicide tolerant crops. The only problem is that you don’t need that technology to make herbicide tolerant crops. Mutagensis and artificial selection works just as well.

8.

gO UgoZHbEFKCDlt eyg@ x

This is more of a screenshot than a meme, but it still summarizes the point perfectly. Genetically engineered sugar beets, as mentioned before, don’t get enough credit for helping the environment. The sugar cane barons have embraced the Non-GMO Project label, officially making the non-GMO groups shills for the Fanjul Bros.

9.

McZLleav aJ NQqvW OGyA
Credit: Biofortified

There are many ways to genetically modify crops. This is why the FDA states that the term non-GMO is very misleading. The term “non-GE” would be honest.

10.

YdNGTBGIrqKpXaIQ dvo g
Source: Biofortified

Did you know that many vitamins used to fortify our food are produced from genetically engineered yeast and bacteria? The Non-GMO Project is so ideologically opposed to biotechnology that they will not allow these types of vitamins in food using their logo. Their web page talks about getting ridding our food supply of herbicide tolerant crops, but appears to skip over this inconvenient truth.

A version of this article was published by the GLP on May 30, 2017. It first appeared at Medium as “10 Best GMO Memes” and was republished with permission.

Stephan Neidenbach is a middle school teacher in living in Annapolis, Maryland. He holds a BS in business administration from Salisbury University and an MS in Instructional Technology from University of Maryland University College. He started and runs the Facebook group We Love GMOs and Vaccines. Follow him on Twitter @welovegv

Prosecutors charge alleged ringleader of $140 million fraudulent organic farming scheme

usda fraud

A Missouri farmer and businessman ripped off consumers nationwide by falsely marketing more than $140 million worth of corn, soybeans and wheat as certified organic grains, federal prosecutors said [December 19].

The long-running fraud scheme outlined in court documents by prosecutors in Iowa is one of the largest uncovered in the fast-growing organic farming industry. The victims included food companies and their customers who paid higher prices because they thought they were buying grains that had been grown using environmentally sustainable practices.

The alleged leader of the scheme was identified as Randy Constant of Chillicothe, Missouri, who was charged with one count of wire fraud. He is expected to plead guilty during a hearing that is scheduled at the federal courthouse in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, on [December 20] …. Three Nebraska farmers who sold their crops to Constant pleaded guilty in October to their roles in the scheme and are awaiting sentencing.

Constant sold more than $142.4 million worth of falsely marketed organic grain to at least 10 customers nationwide between 2010 and mid-2017, when he voluntarily surrendered a certificate to operate in the USDA’s National Organic Program ….

“The number of years they were able to operate at that scale is a betrayal to honest, ethical organic practitioners,” said [Mark] Kastel, the co-founder of the Wisconsin-based Cornucopia Institute, a policy research group …. “It’s a gross betrayal of consumer trust.”

Read full, original article: Missouri farmer charged in $140M organic grain fraud scheme

‘Ancient genes’ could point to our last universal common ancestor

luca

Around 4 billion years ago there lived a microbe called LUCA: the Last Universal Common Ancestor. …

If we trace the far enough back in time, we come to find that we’re all related to LUCA. If the war cry for our exploration of Mars is ‘follow the water’, then in the search for LUCA it’s ‘follow the ‘.

Previous studies of LUCA looked for common, universal genes that are found in all genomes, based on the assumption that if all life has these genes, then these genes must have come from LUCA. ..

Bill Martin and his team realized that a phenomenon known as lateral gene transfer (LGT) was muddying the waters by being responsible for the presence of most of these 11,000 genes. …

Knowing this, Martin’s team searched for ‘ancient’ genes that have exceptionally long lineages but do not seem to have been shared around by LGT, on the assumption that these should therefore come from LUCA. …

Once they had finished their analysis, Bill Martin’s team was left with just 355 genes from the original 11,000, and they argue that these 355 definitely belonged to LUCA and can tell us something about how LUCA lived.

Such a small number of genes, of course, would not support life as we know it, and critics immediately latched onto this apparent gene shortage, pointing out that essential components capable of nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis, for example, were missing. “We didn’t even have a complete ribosome,” admits Martin.

Read full, original post: Looking for LUCA, the last universal common ancestor

Mapping autism’s genetic origins through massive analysis offers new research tool

autism

The largest genetic analysis of postmortem brain tissue to date has yielded maps of when and where genes are turned on and off throughout life — and how that expression is altered in autism.

Researchers published their analysis in a trio of papers on Thursday in Science. [here, here and here]

The researchers analyzed postmortem brain tissue from more than 2,000 people, including about 50 with autism. …

“We use [this] to get new insights into which cell types, time points and biological processes are affected in neuropsychiatric disorders,” says Nenad Sestan, professor of neuroscience at Yale University, who led one of the studies.

Sestan’s study charts the expression of genes in 16 brain regions, from prenatal stages to adulthood. Autism genes are typically most active during mid-fetal development, in excitatory neurons located deep in the cerebral cortex, the brain’s outer layer, the researchers found.

Another study profiles how genes are expressed in the brains of people who have autism, schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. …

A third study cross-references gene-expression data with variations in genetic sequences to tease out the factors that control gene expression in the brain.

“This is an amazing amount of complex information,” says Karoly Mirnics, director of the Munroe-Meyer Institute for Genetics and Rehabilitation at the University of Nebraska in Omaha, who was not involved in any of the studies. “It provides an endless set of data for generating hypotheses that are testable.”

Read full, original post: Massive analysis refines map of autism’s genetic roots

USDA releases long-awaited GMO labeling rules

bioengineered

New disclosure requirements finalized by USDA for biotech foods will mandate the use of the term “bioengineered” while providing a key exemption for ingredients such as vegetable oils, sugar and other foods where the genetically altered DNA of the GMO crop can’t be detected.

The requirements, which will be enforced starting in 2022, also will exempt foods that contain as much as 5 percent of a bioengineered ingredient that the manufacturer can prove was sourced as non-GMO.

USDA released two symbols for bioengineered foods that companies can use on labels. One symbol is for products on which disclosure is required, while the other is for companies that want to label ingredients that are otherwise exempt from the rules. The symbols can be used in full color or black-and-white display.

The mandatory compliance date is Jan. 1, 2022, but companies can start using the symbols and following the disclosure requirements starting [January 2019]. “There is nothing to prevent them from starting” before 2022, a USDA official said.

Zippy Duvall, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation, said the rule …. “provides clarity to the marketplace so that consumers can make informed decisions on the issues that matter to them, and protects the innovation that is critical to the sustainability of agriculture.”

Read full, original article: USDA issues GMO disclosure rules

Viewpoint: If farmers want the public’s trust, they should change how they talk to consumers

fb farmers market

The president of Bayer CropScience Canada, Al Driver, had just finished talking about why his company decided to purchase Monsanto — and how that would affect farmers — when the question of public trust came up.

“It’s the No. 1 issue facing agriculture,” said a farmer attending the keynote at Farm Forum in Calgary. “We need to get through to consumers. We need to change their minds about agriculture.”

And it’s here that I’m going to berate my own industry …. Farmers are not going to get the positive attention of lawmakers with incessant messaging to those that don’t happen to farm that they need to change their attitude towards GMOs, glyphosate or neonics.

‘If we just show them the science, they’ll change their minds,’ is something I hear often. It bothers me.

Science is great and I agree that we need to find ways to better expose the public to the monumental amount of research being conducted in the agriculture industry. But of those farmers calling for a science-based approach to policy and legislation, how many are also ignoring mainstream science on issues such as climate change, relying instead on “wingnuts” or disgraced pundits?

Consumers …. want assurance they’re being told the truth …. The agriculture industry should strive to be honest about its own positions and it should ask of itself what it’s asking of the public.

Read full, original article: The problem with public trust and traceability in farming

Do we really need a more potent, and more addictive, opioid?

dsuviaapplicator

In the midst of a national opioid crisis, how badly do we need another formidable painkiller?

This vexing question has been widely debated since the Food and Drug Administration set off a furor last month when it approved Dsuvia, a tablet version of a decades-old intravenous painkiller that is up to 10 times more potent than the highly addictive fentanyl. Critics argued that alternatives exists and that such a powerful opioid could easily be abused by being diverted, despite a prohibition on retail pharmacy sales. But the endorsement was championed by the military, which maintains that such a medicine is needed in combat zones.

Does the drug deliver the speedy pain relief that is advertised?

In a study of patients who underwent abdominal surgery, they first perceived decreased pain at 15 minutes, which was statistically significant. This is, indeed, rather quick, and was the primary endpoint, although the actual amount of pain did not lessen very much during that time.

In other words, they felt some pain relief in the early going, but Dsuvia did not meaningfully relieve their pain for nearly an hour.

Ultimately, Dsuvia does have a unique method of delivery and may, therefore, prove useful in some battlefield situations. But given the opioid crisis, this episode could prove painful in a very different way.

Read full, original post: The military pushed it for the battlefield. The FDA went along. Is the newest opioid any better?

India should give its farmers access to more GMO crops, scientist argues

india eggplant market

Amid rising concerns over …. Genetically Modified (GM) crops in India, leading biologist Nina Fedoroff has suggested that it [is] about time that India gives [its farmers] access [to GM crops].

…. “There is currently a moratorium on the release of GM crops and many in the system are awaiting approval,” she said, adding that it [is] time that [the] Indian government complete testing of the many GM crops in the pipeline and release [them] to farmers.

“There is no evidence that the GM crops widely grown today are dangerous when consumed either by people in food or by animals in feed,” she further said.

While many crops have been cleared by research experts, including transgenic mustard, their release in the commercial space has been halted by the government due to opposition from many environmental activists. There are, however, various sections of farmers that have protested the central government’s stand on GM crops.

Read full, original article: Time For Indian Govt to Give Farmers Access to GM Crops, Says Leading Scientist

‘Cute aggression’: Why our brains love puppies and kittens

zomgpuppies

I harass my dog [constantly]. She’s a little loaf of a thing, with big eyes and satellite-dish ears and a teeny snoot, and she is so cute that I have overwhelming urges to, among other things, bite her ears and gently boop her nose. As odd as this all might sound when spelled out, [lots] of people share these impulses toward dogs, babies, or other wee things they find excruciatingly adorable.

This affliction has a name: “cute aggression.” And for the first time, researchers have begun to map what’s happening in our brains.

Their findings, published [December 4] in the journal Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, suggest that experiencing cuteness sends many people on a neurochemical roller coaster, with their minds’ attempts to balance themselves resulting in bizarre, intense displays toward tiny, helpless beings. This over-the-top response might serve an important purpose: to ensure that those of us who experience cute aggression don’t spend so much time cooing at a baby or puppy that we forget to take care of it.

Because caretaking is an essential element of human life, mapping the neurological events behind it could also help illuminate other notoriously difficult-to-treat problems, such as postpartum depression. Whatever the future implications, though, at least you now have a scientific explanation for any stray urges you might feel to jiggle a particularly chubby puppy.

Read full, original post: This Is Your Brain on Puppies

Audio: Crash course on the CRISPR-edited foods headed for grocery stores

crispr cover cmyk

Genetically modified organisms, GMOs, have been common on American farms for years. But a new generation of gene-edited food, through a process called CRISPR, is on its way and expected to change our crops and supermarket shelves. Some farmers and scientists say there needs to be oversight of gene-edited crops and animals. Carey Goldberg (@commonhealth) of WBUR reports.

Original audio segment: Gene-Edited CRISPR Food Is Coming To A Supermarket Near You

Bad decision: Did your genes make you do it?

RV AG RIDLEY G

Studies have picked out groups of genes associated with intelligence, academic achievement, criminal activity and other life outcomes. It now seems possible to chart your children’s lives before they ever emerge into the world.

The implications are staggering. Knowing what kind of person a child is likely to become — a kind of scientific prejudice — could easily lead to discrimination. Kids with genes linked to low intelligence could be shunted into inferior schools, and adults with genes linked to criminal activity could be subjected to extra-judicial police scrutiny.

This kind of thinking can be termed “genetic determinism” — the idea that our genes conclusively shape our behavior — and it also wreaks havoc with our notions of morality and free will. If our genes are guiding our behavior, does that mean we’re not responsible?

[S]tudies of identical twins, the gold standard for determining the influence genes have on given traits, have suggested that our DNA is probably responsible for around half of things linked to intelligence and behaviors like educational achievement and criminal activity. That’s far higher than one or 16 percent, but the conclusion is clear: Genetic determinism doesn’t seem to be scientifically possible.

Why not? There are just too many genes, and they interact with each other and with the environment in too many ways. We can’t simply look at a handful and divine the future.

Read full, original post: Can We Blame Our Genes for Our Decisions?

Africa could miss the ‘gene revolution’ if it fails to embrace crop biotech, experts say

BLPD IMUTDF tnY Z f GCPVo A lJVr AaS a CTCbO AOVNEq ztx M nDT v TeB hV fohzmIPDPNoYOqwogevIf McgfQrXixjgq h G UOfonlMBd SB w

Africa can’t afford to be left behind as the gene revolution transforms modern farming, African agricultural experts say.

This is especially true for Nigeria, which must feed its rapidly growing population, said Yarama Ndirpaya, director of partnership and linkages at the Agricultural Research Council of Nigeria (ARCN).

Nigeria and other African nations appear to be foot dragging or undecided about whether to embrace the innovation of biotechnology — an approach that effectively limited their participation in the industrial and green revolutions that swept the world and the technology revolution that is now under way.

“Unfortunately for us, we’ve always joined the train late,” Ndirpaya said. “When the green revolution came, we were left out. Today the gene revolution is here and we’re dragging feet and before we realize it, the train of the gene revolution may also leave us ….”

Dr. Rose Gidado, Nigeria country coordinator of the Open Forum on Agricultural Biotechnology, said biotechnology has been proven safe from over 40 years of practice in other countries ….

“There are a lot of safety protocols that have to be followed internationally and nationally to ensure that whatever goes out there to either the farmers or consumers is actually very safe. There’s not been any deleterious effect arising from its application anywhere in the world,” she said.

Read full, original article: Africa can’t afford to miss the gene revolution, ag experts say

How new technologies are ‘disrupting’ human reproduction

neonatal intensive care unit baby

[On December 4]news of CRISPR-engineered babies launched a firestorm of debate on the future of human reproduction.

But even as scientists, ethicists, and the general public struggled with the implications of a fundamentally-altered reproductive future, other teams released results that also have the potential to disrupt reproduction—not for genetic treatment or enhancement, but to help those who cannot get pregnant produce healthy, living babies.

In one study released in Nature, a team engineered a placenta-like structure inside a test tube. An ephemeral and often forgotten tissue, the placenta is the critical link between the mother and fetus, providing oxygen and nutrients for the developing baby. Failure of the tissue can lead to miscarriages and stillbirths. The “mini-placenta” mimicked its biological counterpart so well that it fooled an off-the-shelf pregnancy test, and it’s now survived for a full year inside its petri dish.

In another case published in The Lancet, scientists transplanted a uterus from a deceased donor into a woman born without one. She carried a living, healthy baby to term, who is also about to celebrate her first birthday later this month.

These successes, in addition to work into lab-generated egg and sperm cells, suggest that human reproduction is poised for the ultimate disruption.

Read full, original post: Disrupting Reproduction: Two New Advances in Tech-Assisted Baby-Making

Are science and religion destined to be at ‘war’?

orig
In his 2015 book Faith versus Fact, the biologist and polemicist Jerry Coyne launched one of his many attacks on religion in the name of science: science and religion, he wrote, are “incompatible in precisely the same way and in the same sense that rationality is incompatible with irrationality”. These sorts of generalities have been quite common down the years, often reinforced by references to the condemnation of Galileo by the Roman Catholic Church in 1633 or the altercation in Oxford in 1860 between T H Huxley and bishop Samuel Wilberforce over evolution.

These sorts of statement can also have repercussions in public life. On September 16 2008, Professor Michael Reiss, an evolutionary biologist, resigned as director of education for the Royal Society. What brought about his removal were observations he’d made about how science teachers should treat questions about origins in schools. He is reported to have said: “Creationism is best seen by scientists not as a misconception, but as a world view.”

Shortly before Reiss turned in his resignation, the Nobel Prize winner Sir Richard Roberts had written to the president of the Royal Society, Sir Martin Rees, demanding “that Professor Reiss step down, or be asked to step down, as soon as possible”. “We gather Professor Reiss is a clergyman, which in itself is very worrisome,” the letter went on:

Who on earth thought that he would be an appropriate Director of Education, who could be expected to answer questions about the differences between science and religion in a scientific, reasoned way?

Commenting on the whole episode in the New Scientist, Sir Harold Kroto, another Nobel laureate, observed:

There is no way that an ordained minister – for whom unverified dogma must represent a major, if not the major, pillar in their lives – can present free-thinking, doubt-based scientific philosophy honestly or disinterestedly.

Complications

Enshrined in these assertions is the assumption that science and religion are inescapably at war. And yet we must ask whether this assumption can possibly do justice to the great diversity of ways in which the relations between science and religion have been understood.

There are many sciences, many religions. A scientific innovation problematic for one religious tradition may be irrelevant to another. One science may pose a threat to religious beliefs when other sciences do not. Arguing for an essential conflict between science and religion fails because, as the philosopher John Gray has written, terms such as “religion” and “atheism” have no essence.

12-3-2018 file-20181113-194488-1yb9g8
Clerks studying astronomy and geometry. Image credit: Wikimedia Commons

The sciences may sometimes provide answers to questions once asked within the faith traditions – but they also leave space for religious enquiry and commitment. How do we prioritise competing scientific research projects? With limited resources we must ask what is more important for humankind. But these are not scientific questions – as the historian Noah Yuval Harari identifies in his best-seller Sapiens, only religions and ideologies seek to answer them: “Scientific research can flourish only in alliance with some religion or ideology.”

Because science and religion can complement one another as well as come into conflict, the story of their interrelations is complex.

Flash points and trading zones

Looking back over history, we certainly find many occasions when science and religion have been in conflict. Call these flash points. Among these is the rejection of miracles by those convinced that nature is bound by unbreakable natural laws. Or the denial of human freedom by those who see the human mind as nothing more than the workings of brain chemistry.

In the early 17th century some Catholics found new theories of matter disturbing because of the challenges they posed to their understanding of the Eucharist. For some Jews, the ban on astrology between 200AD and 500AD stifled astronomical inquiry. For biblical literalists, Darwinian evolution routinely provokes an oppositional stance.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

On the other hand, we can identify many points of conciliation and enrichment. Think of these as trading zones. Take the biblical idea that all humankind is descended from a single source. This belief inspired the search for the beginnings of human language and for the routes by which early humans diffused across the globe.

In the 17th century, scientific instruments such as the telescope and microscope were conceived as ways of reversing the effects of Adam’s fall from grace. Scientific methods and instruments were devised as a means for ameliorating the damage to human cognitive powers and sensory apparatus believed to have been brought about by human sinfulness.

Or consider the whole matter of design in the world. This idea was fundamental to the development of the science of ecology. Key early works of natural history which stressed the intimate connections between organisms and their environments were motivated in good part by a belief that God had fitted animals and plants to the environmental regimes in which they were located.

12-3-2018 file-20181113-194513-1y5sbti
A 40-foot telescope constructed by W Herschel. Image credit: Wellcome Collection, CC BY

In our own day, there may well be benefits to be derived from a dialogue between theological anthropology and those advocating transhumanism. New technological possibilities are raising profound questions about what it means to be human, a subject on which theologians have had much to say. At the very least, theology might prove to be a useful conversational partner in articulating values by which to adjudicate among the human capacities that might be prioritised for enhancement.

The survival of religion

With their different sources of authority, the potential for tension, divergence, even animosity between representatives of scientific and religious communities will always be there. But tension, divergence, animosity – even conflict – are not the same as inevitable warfare. Many religious people have been indifferent to science. Many scientists have experienced alienation from religion. Mutual suspicion is not uncommon. But, again, indifference, alienation and suspicion are not the same as warfare.

The very words “science” and “religion” have undergone profound changes of meaning. Not until the second half of the 19th century did “science” become a convenient umbrella to capture an expanding range of specialised empirical enquiries, supposedly – but not always actually – united by a common “scientific method”.

Can religions survive in technological societies? They already have – and for an important reason. They confer identity and seek to find meaning in events, to interpret the universe, not primarily to explain it. As Terry Eagleton memorably put it: “The blunder of believing that religion is a botched attempt to explain the world … is like seeing ballet as a botched attempt to run for a bus.”

David N Livingstone is a Professor of Geography and Intellectual History at Queen’s University Belfast

John Hedley Brooke is an Emeritus Professor of Science and Religion at the University of Oxford

A version of this article was originally published on the Conversation’s website asWar between science and religion is far from inevitable and has been republished here with permission.

Can we meet a growing need for food without destroying our environment?

Feature intensification main x

This article by Paul McDivitt originally ran at Ensia and has been republished here with permission.

The history of agriculture is best described as getting “more for more.” The more land we farmed, the more food we produced. The more water, fertilizers and pesticides we applied, the more bountiful our harvests. While modern farming successfully feeds billions of people, its rapid expansion has also led to biodiversity loss, polluted waterways and rising greenhouse gas emissions. As the world population climbs toward 10 billion people and the impacts of climate change set in, this approach is not sustainable.

“The big advances we need to see in the future, which people frame as ‘sustainable intensification,’ is where we need to get more for less,” says Navin Ramankutty, interim director of the Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability at The University of British Columbia.

Debates over the future of food and farming are often framed as a choice between two seemingly diametrical approaches. One, conventional agriculture, aims to produce as much food as possible with vast monocultures dependent on irrigation systems, synthetic fertilizers and pesticides. The other, organic farming, prioritizes sustainability, using natural inputs and processes to make farms more hospitable to nature.

Brachiaria grasses and other forages are being used in western Kenya as part of a “push-pull” approach to pest management and soil fertility improvement developed by the International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology. Image credit: CIAT, from Flickr, licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

An evolving concept called sustainable intensification seeks to bridge this gap by taking the best ideas from both sides and minimizing their weaknesses, such as conventional agriculture’s fertilizer overuse and organic farming’s tendency toward lower yields.

“We just can’t go all conservation agriculture or organic,” explains Vara Prasad, a crop scientist at Kansas State University. “At the same time, we cannot afford to be polluting our environment with the negative impacts that are happening now.”

Sustainable intensification recognizes the need to produce enough food to feed a growing population, but seeks to do so in the most environmentally friendly way possible. In particular, it focuses on increasing yields — the amount of food produced per unit of land — as a way to minimize the need to convert forest and other uncultivated land to farms.

“That first cut makes a big difference, so anything we can do to avoid that is great,” says Ramankutty, in reference to deforestation in Brazil and Indonesia caused by agricultural expansion.

graphic 12 5 18
Analysis of 85 integrated pest management projects in Asia and Africa showed that most reduced pesticide use without causing a yield decline. Adapted from Pretty, J., & Bharucha, Z. (2015) Integrated Pest Management for Sustainable Intensification of Agriculture in Asia and Africa. Insects 6:152-182.

Environmental sustainability is just as important as increasing production, says Prasad. In addition to preserving wild lands, environmental objectives include reducing greenhouse gas emissionsnitrogen and phosphorus runoffand pesticide pollution, and protecting freshwater resources. However, sustainable intensification realizes that there is no perfect solution. With so many targets, there are bound to be trade-offs.

Sustainable intensification does not specify particular technologies or practices. Instead, it focuses on desired outcomes: more food on less land, with less of an adverse impact on the environment.

Win-Win Strategies

While the concept is open, scientists studying sustainable intensification point to several evidence-backed strategies and technologies that can increase yields while achieving environmental gains. A recent study published in Nature Sustainability estimates that 163 million farms covering some 453 million hectares (1 billion acres) are practicing some form of sustainable intensification.

One of the most promising strategies is improving crop varieties and livestock breeds. Developing pest- and disease-resistant seeds through traditional breeding or genetic engineering can increase yields and reduce pesticide use. Cultivars suited to local conditions and weather extremes, such as drought and heat, can also help farmers produce more food without degrading ecosystems. 

Farmers in Virginia use no-till practices to protect wildlife habitat and water quality in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. Photo courtesy of USDA, from Flickr, licensed under CC BY 2.0

Efficient use of inputs is a common goal in sustainable intensification practices. Integrated pest management, which employs strategies such as biological controls to combat pests, can protect crops without harming beneficial insects. A 2015 meta-analysis of 85 integrated pest management projects found a “mean yield increase across projects and crops of 41 percent, combined with a decline in pesticide use to 31 percent.” Conservation agriculture practices — such as no-till farming, cover cropping and crop rotations — improve soil quality and reduce weeds, cutting costs and storing carbon underground.

The Sustainable and Resilient Farming Systems Intensification in Eastern Gangetic Plains project, a collaboration of the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research and the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center, aims to improve productivity of smallholder agriculture in Nepal. Image credit: IFPRI South Asia, from Flickr, licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Growing trees and shrubs on and around crop and pasture land can benefit farmers and local ecosystems, providing habitat to birds and other creatures. Trees on silvopastures protect animals from the hot sun in the summer and cold winds in the winter, and the nutritious grasses beneath them beef up livestock quickly and cheaply. Trees on and around farms can fix nitrogen in the soil, sequester carbon, and reduce runoff and soil erosion. 

Technology such as precision farming equipment — which combines detailed data with robots, sensors and imaging to plant seeds and apply water, fertilizers and pesticides in more efficient ways — can increase the productivity of already high-yielding farms while cutting costs on inputs. Among a host of win-win technologies under development are improved weather forecasting tools, which help farmers select optimal planting and harvesting dates, and nitrogen-fixing liquid probiotics, which could replace at least some synthetic fertilizers.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

Another strategy involves growing crops on fallow land and planting and harvesting more often on existing cropland. Doing so increases the productivity of land already cleared for crops, reducing the need to convert forests and other natural habitats.

“There’s no shortage of technical tools, technical opportunities that people can use to both increase crop productivity and reduce their environmental impact,” saysTim Searchinger, a professor at Princeton and a researcher at the World Resources Institute. “It’s not a scientific problem, it’s a doing problem.”

Location and Context

In some areas, such as sub-Saharan Africa, yields are very low due primarily to a lack of water and nutrients in the soil.  This low baseline means that the tools of modern farming offer a huge opportunity to get more food out of existing farmland. However, if this intensification is to be sustainable, it will be crucial to pair this access with programs that educate farmers about best practices to avoid waste and pollution, Prasad says.

“One thing that often gets forgotten is that fertilizer application isn’t inherently bad,” explains Michael Clark, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Oxford. “When you start applying too much is when it becomes an issue.”

Small farms in China produced fewer greenhouse gas emissions after farmers participated in training programs focusing on fertilizer management. Adapted from Cui, Z., et al. Nature http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature25785 (2018)

 

China is doing its part to combat fertilizer overuse by funding agricultural scientists to live in villages, where they teach farmers when and how to apply fertilizer more effectively. These initiatives helped over 20 million smallholder farmers increase yields of corn, rice and wheat ten percent while reducing fertilizer use 15 percent, significantly cutting greenhouse gas emissions in the process.

As new regions adopt water irrigation systems to boost crop yields, farmers with first access tend to overuse the precious resource, leaving little for late adopters. Local regulations and water user groups can help farmers use water in more efficient, equitable and sustainable ways.

Farmers in Ethiopia are using local grass mulch and drip irrigation to sustainably intensify their yields. Image credit: Sustainable Intensification Innovation Lab

In addition to agricultural technologies and practices, building up social and economic structures and institutions is an important part of sustainable intensification. Prasad says that investing in farmer field schools and developing extension programs in developing countries is necessary to help farmers implement sustainable practices and technologies.

Sustainable Food System

Although sustainable intensification is an important part of making agriculture more sustainable, it can’t do the job alone. If we try to produce enough food to meet current projections without expanding cropland, we would need to increase crop yields 11 percent more from 2006 to 2050 than we did from 1962 to 2006 — a tall order given that past gains are largely attributed to added inputs. Clark says that a truly sustainable food system must also address food waste and overeating, as well as shift diets away from meat and dairy, which account for an outsize shareof agriculture’s environmental footprint.

In addition, in what’s known as Jevons paradox, efficiency gains can incentivize farmers to produce more, which can lead to additional land clearing. In order to reap the full benefits of sustainable intensification, we’ll have to do a better job of making sure that natural areas are off limits to agricultural expansion

Although challenges remain, the math of sustainable intensification is simple: The more food we produce on the least amount of land with the least environmental impact, the better off humans — and nature — will be.View Ensia homepage

Paul McDivitt is a science and environmental writer. Follow him on his website and Twitter @PaulMcDivitt

Nigeria releases GMO cowpea, urges farmers not to reject technology out of fear

cowpeaprotec e

After nine years of field trials, the Federal Government has released genetically modified …. cowpeas to farmers in [Nigeria]. Director General of the National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA), Dr. Rufus Ebegba, disclosed this [December 18] …. in Abuja.

He explained that the application for commercial release of GMO crops was the first of its kind and in line with [the] NBMA Act to build on past efforts of basic science …. Ebegba added that every new technology is bound to face suspicion and concerns, stressing that Nigerian farmers should not fail to explore due to fear of the unknown.

Read full, original article: FG begins release of GMO cowpeas to farmers

GMO houseplant traps carcinogenic chemicals that home air filters miss

download
[M]ost of us like to keep the air in our homes as clean as possible and we often go to great lengths in order to keep offending allergens, dust particles, and even chemicals at bay. Yet, some hazardous compounds are too small to be trapped in these filters.

Now, researchers at the University of Washington (UW) have genetically modified a common houseplant—pothos ivy or devil’s ivy—to remove chloroform and benzene from the air around it. The modified plants express a mammalian protein, called 2E1, that transforms these compounds into molecules that the plants can then use to support their own growth.

Small molecules like chloroform, which is present in small amounts in chlorinated water, or benzene, which is a component of gasoline, build up in our homes when we shower or boil water, or when we store cars or lawn mowers in attached garages. These compounds are too small to be captured by even HEPA air filters and exposure to each has been linked to cancer.

“People haven’t really been talking about these hazardous organic compounds in homes, and I think that’s because we couldn’t do anything about them,” noted senior study investigator Stuart Strand, Ph.D., a research professor in the UW’s civil and environmental engineering department. “Now we’ve engineered houseplants to remove these pollutants for us.”

Read full, original article: GMO Houseplant Purifies Air of Hazardous Compounds

Why post-traumatic stress disorder in children can be diagnosed as autism

Jills son

All I knew at first was that Jeremy’s mother wanted her son assessed for autism. The boy had been a social toddler, his mother recalled. But over the years, he had begun to avoid others and engage in repetitive play. He had also become prone to violent outbursts.

Over the course of our session, I learned that Jeremy and his brother had been abused by their father. Their mother, whom I will call Joy, had been unaware of the abuse for almost a year. She was not sure when Jeremy’s behavior had changed and whether it was before or after the abuse began.

Joy suspected her son had post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). He had, in fact, received a PTSD diagnosis.

At first, I couldn’t figure out why anyone thought Jeremy has autism. He made eye contact with me and used gestures to communicate when he had trouble expressing himself with words.

Jeremy’s repetitive play, coupled with the communication difficulties stemming from his language barrier, quickly helped me to understand why so many professionals suspected autism. After all, having repetitive behaviors and restricted interests is a core feature of autism.

It is critical for clinicians to recognize that some features that appear related to autism, such as withdrawal from peers, rigid play and angry outbursts, may be more accurately categorized as PTSD.

Read full, original post: Post-traumatic stress disorder may mimic autism in some children

glp menu logo outlined

Newsletter Subscription

* indicates required
Email Lists