iPSCs are one of the most powerful tools of biosciences Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link The endless possibilities of iPSCs and organoids 11/07/25, 11:02 Last updated: Published: 20/01/24, 11:50 iPSCs are one of the most powerful tools of biosciences On the 8th of October 2012, the Nobel Prize in Physiology was given to Shinya Yamanaka and John B. Gurdon for a groundbreaking discovery; induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (iPSCs). The two scientists discovered that mature, specialised cells can be reprogrammed to their initial state and consequently transformed into any cell type. These cells can be used to study disease, examine genetic variations and test new treatments. The science behind iPSCs The creation of iPSCs is based on the procedure of cell potency during mammalian development. While the organism is still in the embryonic stage, the first cell developed is a totipotent stem cell, which has the unique ability to differentiate into any cell type in the human body. “Totipotent” refers to the cell’s potential to give rise to all cell types and tissues needed to develop an entire organism. As the totipotent cell grows, it develops into the pluripotent cell, which can differentiate into the three types of germ layers; the endoderm line, the mesoderm line and the ectoderm line. The cells of each line then develop into multipotent cells, which are derived into all types of human somatic cells, such as neuronal cells, blood cells, muscle cells, skin cells, etc. Creation of iPSCs and organoids iPSCs are produced through a process called cellular reprogramming, which involves the reprogramming of differentiated cells to revert to a pluripotent state, similar to that of embryonic stem cells. The process begins with selecting any type of somatic cell from the individual (in most cases, the individual is a patient). Four transcription factors, Oct4, Sox2, Klf4 and c-Myc, are introduced into the selected cells. These transcription factors are important for the maintenance of pluripotency. They are able to activate the silenced pluripotency genes of the adult somatic cells and turn off the genes associated with differentiation. The somatic cells are now transformed into iPSCs, which can differentiate into any somatic cell type if provided with the right transcription factor. Although iPSCs themselves have endless applications in biosciences, they can also be transformed into organoids, miniature three-dimensional organ models. To create organoids, iPSCs are exposed to a specific combination of signalling molecules and growth factors that mimic the development of the desired organ. Current applications of iPSCs As mentioned earlier, iPSCs can be used to study disease mechanisms, develop personalised therapies and test the action of drugs in human-derived tissues. iPSCs have already been used to model cardiomyocytes, neuronal cells, keratinocytes, melanocytes and many other types of cells. Moreover, kidney, liver, lung, stomach, intestine, and brain organoids have already been produced. In the meantime, diseases such as cardiomyopathy, Alzheimer’s disease, cystic fibrosis and blood disorders have been successfully modelled and studied with the use of iPSCs. Most importantly, the use of iPSCs in all parts of scientific research reduces or replaces the use of animal models, promising a more ethical future in biosciences. Conclusion iPSCs are one of the most powerful tools of biosciences at the moment. In combination with gene editing techniques, iPSCs give accessibility to a wide range of tissues and human disorders and open the doors for precise, personalised and innovative therapies. iPSCs not only promise accurate scientific research but also ethical studies that minimise the use of animal models and embryonic cells. Written by Matina Laskou Related articles: Organoids in drug discovery / Introduction to stem cells Project Gallery

Protective bodies regulate animal use in research worldwide Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link Animal ethics: the good, the bad, and the ugly? 03/04/26, 17:04 Last updated: Published: 09/06/24, 12:07 Protective bodies regulate animal use in research worldwide Many research trials involve using animals, specifically those labelled as ‘model organisms’. This refers to species of animals that are desirable for scientific research as they are usually cost-effective, easily manipulated, and well understood in terms of their genetic background. Good knowledge of their genetic background allows for these experiments to be applied with the intention of human benefit. Protective bodies regulate animal use in research worldwide, albeit with various degrees of severity. One of the strictest regions when it comes to animal legislation is the United Kingdom. The Animal Scientific Procedures Act 1986 protects the use of animals in the UK; they, do this by only licensing trusted individuals and experiments that follow the principle of the ‘3Rs’. This principle aims to; r educe the number of animals used r efine procedures to reduce pain r eplace experiments on animals with artificial systems such as cell cultures. In November 2025, the UK government published its official roadmap to accelerate the transition away from animal use in science; "This includes an end to regulatory testing on animals to assess the potential for new treatments to cause skin and eye irritation and skin sensitisation by the end of 2026." Research by Byron Blagburn and coworkers had some controversy as they tested four commercially available heartworm preventatives in dogs, as they first had to infect them. This parasitic worm that was infected in the dogs is extremely severe and life-threatening. The point of the experiment was to see which was the most effective treatment, and they did find that the combination of imidacloprid and moxidectin was 100% effective at eradicating the infection. Despite this research being approved by the Auburn University, Alabama USA Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee, many ethical principles were breached. As the dogs had no choice but to participate in the experiment which completely disregards the autonomy of the dogs. However, Byron and his colleagues would counteract that argument by saying they acted with beneficence as the study’s intention was to find out what was the best treatment for the dogs to improve their health. But for this beneficence to be achieved, non-maleficence was broken as the dogs were given parasitic infections that inflicted pain. Unfortunately, according to the DxE investigators (Direct Action Everywhere), after 5 months the dogs were euthanised. Although the researchers defended the morality of their study by pointing out that all treatments were already in commerce, some have argued that the infection of a previously healthy dog with a parasite is morally wrong. Many religions and groups oppose the use of animals in research as they value animal life as much as human life. Buddhists, for example, believe that animals have moral significance, as the Buddha condemns occupations that involve harming animals and encourages his followers to help animals where they can. While many groups stand against this research, most of our findings and medicine today would not be available without the contribution of animals. According to the American Medical Association: Virtually every advance in medical science in the 20th century, from antibiotics and vaccines to antidepressant drugs and organ transplants, has been achieved either directly or indirectly through the use of animals in laboratory experiments. Thus, showing how important the use of animals is in terms of medical advancements and improvement of human life. One of the most vocal groups is People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals ( PETA): PETA is an organisation advocating for animal rights and strongly opposing many of the current research studies. For example, the research of sepsis is undertaken at many universities like Pittsburgh and California involves puncturing of mice intestines while awake and then stitching multiple of these punctured mice together. This then leads to the excruciating death of these animals. Now, this has aided in the knowledge of sepsis and potential treatment. However, the autonomy of the animals is disregarded whilst the researchers act with maleficence. Therefore, we are at a vital stage with animal experimentation as the intention is for improving health and can be argued to be necessary for the advancing medicine for humans and animals. Nevertheless, religious groups and animal rights groups believe that justice is not being served as the animals are subject to harm without a choice. Despite the advancements of artificial systems such as organ-on-a-chip (OOC) - multi-channel 3-D microfluidic cell culture that simulates the activities, mechanics and physiological response of an entire organ or an organ system, the findings of animal studies are required before trialling within humans. When artificial systems improve and become more available there could be a world where animal studies are limited or non-existent to please animal rights activists and still aid the enhancements of modern-day medicine. Written by Harvey Wilkes Related articles: Regulation and policy of stem cell research / Miniature organs in biomedicine REFERENCES Blagburn, B.L., Arther, R.G., Dillon, A.R., Butler, J.M., Bowles, J.V., von Simson, C. and Zolynas, R., 2016. Efficacy of four commercially available heartworm preventive products against the JYD-34 laboratory strain of Dirofilaria immitis. Parasites & vectors, 9, pp.1-10. Mice stitched together, injected with bacteria-take action! (no date) PETA. Available at: https://support.peta.org/page/6980/action/1?locale=en-US (Accessed: 29 May 2024). Project Gallery

An overview Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link The Crab Nebula 14/02/25, 13:44 Last updated: Published: 23/03/24, 17:45 An overview Of the 270 known supernova remnants, the Crab Nebula is one of the more well known in popular science, originating from a violent supernova explosion first discovered by Chinese astronomer Wang Yei-te in July of 1054 AD. Yei-te reported the appearance of a “guest star” so bright that it was visible during the day for three weeks, and at night for 22 months. In 1731, English astronomer John Bevis rediscovered the object, which was then observed by Charles Messier in 1758 prompting the nebula’s lesser-known name, Messier 1. Located approximately 6,500 light years from Earth, the nebula cannot be seen with the naked eye but observations in different wavelengths gives rise to the beautiful colored images often published. The Crab Nebula is the result of a violent explosion process that signals what astronomers call “star death.” This occurs when the star runs out of fuel for the fusion process in its core that produces an outward pressure counteracting the constant inward pressure of the star’s outer shells. With the loss of outward pressure, these layers suddenly collapse inwards and produce an explosion astrophysicists call a supernova. Following the explosion, the original star, named SN1054 in this case, collapsed into a rapidly spinning neutron star, also known as a pulsar, which is generally roughly the size of Manhattan, New York. The pulsar is situated at the center of the nebula and ejects two beams of radiation that, while the pulsar rotates, makes it appear as if the object is pulsing 30 times per second. Studies of the Crab Nebula were primarily conducted by the Hubble Space Telescope. Hubble spent three months capturing 24 images that were assembled into a colorful mosaic resembling not what is visible with human eyes, but rather a kind of paint-by-number image where each color mapped to a particular element. Traces of hydrogen, neutral oxygen, doubly ionized oxygen, and sulfur have been detected across multiple wavelengths as the remains span an expanding six to eleven light-year-wide remnant of the supernova event. It was not until 1942 that the Crab Nebula was officially found to be related to the recorded supernova explosion of 1054. This establishment was jointly provided by Professor J. J. L. Duyvendak of Leiden University as well as astronomers N. U. Mayall and J. Oort. Due to its long history of rediscovery and inherent beauty, the Crab Nebula remains as one of the most studied celestial objects today and continues to provide valuable insight into astrophysical processes. Written by Amber Elinsky REFERENCES Hester, J. Jeff. “The Crab Nebula: An Astrophysical Chimera,” Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics 46 (2008): 127-155. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.astro.45.051806.110608 . Hester, J. and A. Loll. “Messier 1 (The Crab Nebula),” NASA. https://science.nasa.gov/mission/hubble/science/explore-the-night-sky/hubble-messier-catalog/messier-1/ . Image ref.: European Space Agency; Space Australia; dreamstime. Mayall, N. U., and J. H. Oort. “FURTHER DATA BEARING ON THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE CRAB NEBULA WITH THE SUPERNOVA OF 1054 A. D. PART II. THE ASTRONOMICAL ASPECTS.” Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 54, no. 318 (1942): 95–104. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40670293 Project Gallery

How colonialism, interventionism and health are interwoven Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link How colonialism and geopolitics shape health injustices: a deep, critical reflection Last updated: 02/04/26, 18:29 Published: 16/10/25, 08:00 How colonialism, interventionism and health are interwoven This is the final article (article no. 7) in a series about global health injustices. Previous article: Addressing the health landscape in Bangladesh's Rohingya community Introduction Welcome to the reflective article of the Global Health Injustices Series. Before I begin, I want to thank Jana Antar again for her contributions to the Lebanon and Syria article, and Dr Nasif Mahmood for his contributions to the Rohingya people in Bangladesh article. Writing and researching about these different countries was an incredible experience. Although I initially planned for this series to go beyond ten articles, focusing on the most enduring and neglected injustices was vital, particularly as the world is becoming more dynamic with geopolitical power shifts. With this in mind, I want to emphasise that each vulnerable population faces unique challenges, but they have challenges shared with others that are not mentioned in this series. I wanted to address these injustices because they are urgent and demonstrate how interconnected global struggles truly are. Through writing this last article, I deepened my understanding of how colonialism, interventionism, and health are interwoven. How the past impacts present reality (colonialism) The injustices we see in news headlines, social media, or the ones we directly experience should not be understood as isolated examples ( Table 1 ). Instead, they stem from European colonialism and later foreign interventionism, shaping how regional governments were created. The ongoing Gaza genocide and expanding illegal settlements pushing out Palestinians in the West Bank are due to Israel’s brutal military occupation and apartheid for 70+ years, and its acts, including the Nakba. Sudan had external rulers (notably Egypt and the British Empire) contributing to its civil wars through political destabilisation, among other factors. This similarly happened in Yemen, though it is also important to note that foreign intervention from the United States (US) and Saudi Arabian governments contributed to the country's existing crises. Lebanon and Syria were divided up and governed by Britain and France after the Ottoman Empire collapsed shortly after World War 1, a significant event leading to political destabilisation and ongoing catastrophes, which also happened to Palestine. In Kashmir, the people’s plight erupted through the British Empire partitioning the Indian subcontinent into multiple nations in 1947 (India, West Pakistan becoming Pakistan and East Pakistan becoming Bangladesh), with Kashmir being a disputed territory between Pakistan and India. As for the Rohingya population and Bangladesh, civil wars during the 20th century and ensuing persecution by the government of Myanmar have contributed to their crises. Therefore, it is clear that all of these events I summarised showcase how their root causes lead to the substantial effects of the current daily injustices. Moreover, what connects these substantial injustices and many others worldwide traces back to the consequences of European colonialism; these powers dispossessed indigenous peoples of their lands and resources through violence, subsequently broken treaties, or legal frameworks that did not identify Indigenous land tenure systems. While they did disrupt indigenous governments, some recent injustices prevail because post-colonial elites embraced or exacerbated these exploitative systems. This severed deep cultural, spiritual, and economic ties that indigenous communities had with their land. For example, Canada’s colonial legacy, notably its Indian Residential Schools, involved forcibly removing children from their families, leading to negative outcomes for the Indigenous communities. Moreover, it is vital to acknowledge the impact of settler colonialism on Indigenous communities globally across South America, Africa, Asia and the Aboriginal people of Australia and New Zealand. If we do not critically think and learn about these past events, how will we improve our present reality and build a future for everyone? Table 1: Summary of the historical and modern perpetrators of injustices affecting the countries/communities explored in the Global Health Injustices Series Country/ community explored in the Global Health Injustices Series Main perpetrator(s) of their injustices Palestine Israel + foreign military aid from the US, UK + other countries Sudan RSF + other local political factions with foreign military aid from the UAE + other countries Yemen Houthis + other local political factions + foreign Interventionism from Saudi Arabia + US + foreign military aid Lebanon Local political factions + US, UK + other countries Syria Local political factions + US, UK + other countries Kashmir Indian + Pakistani militaries + foreign military aid Rohinyga Government of Myanmar + foreign military aid Bangladesh UK via the partition of Subcontinental India (1947), contributing to later injustices Current major health problems Health is essential in global injustices because it is a mirror and a driver of the disparities among various populations. Accessing quality healthcare is usually affected by factors, such as race and ethnicity, which accentuate deep-rooted inequalities. For example, communities with lower incomes encounter challenges, ranging from a lack of healthcare infrastructure to environmental hazards, leading to worse health outcomes. Therefore, tackling them is essential for achieving justice, as improved health outcomes can empower marginalised groups. Aside from warfare being a major determinant of health and injustice, I want to highlight migration as a significant co-occurring determinant. Although research is expanding, the bidirectional relationship between migration and health remains inadequately incorporated into practice and laws. Migration is a complicated and heterogeneous multiphase process ( Figure 1 ). Meanwhile, collecting migration data remains difficult due to polarised political views, unwillingness to finance research on discriminatory laws, varying migration definitions, and limited comparable global data. Unfortunately, political rhetoric and media depictions form incorrect assumptions, stereotypes, and negative views of migrants and refugees, leading to a weakened understanding of the severity and positive aspects of migration. Also, this manifests into hatred and scapegoating of migrants and refugees through their “perceived” impact on countries like employment and healthcare. In reality, accessing employment and healthcare is very difficult for them, leading to negative health outcomes. Thinking more broadly, health behaviours are not solely individual choices, but are deeply rooted in and affected by social, cultural, and political environments. For example, when looking at politics and health through a framework ( Figure 2 ), it is clear how politics is influential through labour markets and welfare states, leading to socioeconomic, income and wealth inequalities and poor health. One systematic review found that a generous welfare state is typically associated with positive population health outcomes, with the Nordic model as an example. This suggests that political leaders are vital in affecting agendas, encouraging intersectoral partnerships, and showing political will to promote health equity. Another review supported the benefits of a generous welfare state through maternal and child health outcomes. Therefore, health and politics are intertwined, as addressed in previous articles through specific contexts. Now I will discuss it more broadly. Current major geopolitical problems Geopolitical dynamics are crucial to shaping the lives of vulnerable populations by influencing their access to security, resources, and fundamental human rights; this is impacted by governments, policies, geographies, and the relationships and interests between countries. In countries or regions plagued by continuous conflict or authoritarian governments, these communities often find themselves at greater risk of challenges like displacement, violence, and systemic discrimination. Moreover, the complicated relationship between global and local power systems results in specific communities being neglected, as more powerful geopolitical interests repeatedly overshadow their needs. To truly support these communities, it is vital to consider how foreign interventionism from countries like the US and the UK impacts the Palestinians, Sudanese, Lebanese, Syrian, Yemeni, Kashmiri, and the Rohingya populations. Foreign interventionism, which typically occurs through militarism, is characterised as the international and social relations of training for and executing organised political violence; this is a pervasive feature of geopolitics, rising into civilian domains by shaping countries and regions. Then, humanitarianism is typically seen as an unbiased moral discourse centred on universal humanity and aid. Yet, it is historically linked to militarism, particularly in Western countries and has deepened in recent decades. Humanitarian standards, like International Humanitarian Law (IHL), are supposed to limit wars’ consequences, but IHL may implicitly tolerate particular levels of ‘collateral damage’ as allowable. IHL is embedded in a hierarchy that determines who can be saved and who cannot, possibly causing inequalities and unstable power relations tied to imperial dynamics. Hence, I see Western humanitarianism as deeply entangled with militarism because of how it can serve to justify and expand political violence across diverse countries and regions, as seen in modern news headlines. More importantly, this dynamic drives a vicious cycle of violence, where armed conflicts cause vulnerability by destroying infrastructure, destabilising nations and other negative consequences, like climate change and rising extremism, leading to civil wars and genocide. Moving forward To truly move forward, adopting a multifaceted approach (e.g. decolonising global health) to addressing all the injustices and health disparities is vital; this can work, but I think that should involve giving all the most vulnerable communities their autonomy, liberation and fundamental human rights. There is the notion of peace plans coming from Western governments like the US, yet that cannot start without putting those directly experiencing war, genocide, displacement, ethnic cleansing and other atrocities as the central voice in those conversations. Moreover, we should highlight those most accountable for making amends. For example, they should allow a right to return and a payment of extensive reparations to the displaced Palestinians, Sudanese, Lebanese, Syrian, Yemeni, Kashmiri, and the Rohingya populations to their homelands, among numerous others. The big question is whether these suggestions will become tangible realities. Although reparations and the right to return may seem distant from contemporary political realities, they are moral imperatives for real justice to occur. Continuously raising awareness and rallying support for affected communities so they can tackle their needs and challenges is important. There is also advocacy, which is vital in showcasing the issues they encounter, which can pave the way for significant policy changes. Moreover, the participation of local and international non-governmental organisations (NGOs), like Amnesty International, is crucial for enforcing ongoing solutions, as they better grasp the vulnerable communities’ needs. When these efforts are done collaboratively, fostering a more supportive environment for those needing it most is vital. Unfortunately, NGOs cannot replace genuine international political will because their impact will always be limited without structural change. Importantly, recognising how interconnected everyone is as a global community is crucial. Engaging in different cultures and experiences should foster empathy and build a collective strength to face challenges, notably climate change and warfare driven by the weapons industry. Uniting and sharing knowledge can encourage real change and all countries actually following international law, which requires powerful countries to be held responsible in ways that have been avoided so far; this should involve acknowledging that the vulnerable communities have a right to resist and defend themselves against their oppressors. Conclusion The global health injustices seen today have historical roots in European colonialism, which has stripped indigenous global communities of their homelands and disrupted their cultural connections. Furthermore, they are influenced by many factors. Moreover, health behaviours are influenced by the broader social, cultural, and political landscapes. Geopolitical dynamics impact vulnerable populations by undermining their security, access to resources, and fundamental human rights; foreign interventionism via militarism makes them worse. Humanitarianism with militarism can reinforce cycles of violence by legitimising unequal power dynamics despite its good intentions. To effectively tackle the global health injustices, uplifting vulnerable communities by prioritising their human rights is vital. The perpetrators should pay reparations and grant the right of return to the most impacted. As individuals, we must raise awareness and push for policy changes. Local and international organisations are pivotal in understanding and addressing community needs. With everything said, I enjoyed writing this series because it showed me how connected all these injustices are and how we can act, listen and reflect together. Ultimately, we must focus on all the countries and communities highlighted in this series, as well as others currently facing injustices like the Uyghurs in China and Afghanistan. We must open our eyes, hearts, souls, and minds to nurture global connections and share knowledge for impactful change. Written by Sam Jarada Related articles: How does physical health affect mental health? / Beyond medicine: health through different stances / Addressing Health Inequalities REFERENCES Banat BYI, Entrena-Durán F, Dayyeh J. Palestinian Refugee Youth: Reproduction of Collective Memory of the Nakba. Asian Social Science. 2018 Nov 29;14(12):147.2. Amiad Haran Diman, Miodownik D. Bloody Pasts and Current Politics: The Political Legacies of Violent Resettlement. Comparative Political Studies. 2023 Aug 13;57(9). Abubakar M, Yahaya TB. Secession and border disputes in Africa: The case of Sudan and South Sudan border. African Journal of Political Science and International Relations. 2021 Oct 31;15(4):131–8. Tamer Abd Elkreem, Jaspars S. Sudan’s catastrophe: the role of changing dynamics of food and power in the Gezira agricultural scheme. Disasters [Internet]. 2024 Oct 30 [cited 2025 Sep 18];49(1). Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11603519/ eClinicalMedicine. Under the shade of world events: a never-ending crisis in Yemen. EClinicalMedicine [Internet]. 2023 Oct 1 [cited 2025 Sep 18];64:102302–2. Available from: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(23)00479-0/fulltext Bordón J, Eyad Alrefai. Saudi Arabia’s Foreign aid: the Singularity of Yemen as a Case Study. Third World Quarterly. 2023 Jul 14;45:1–18. Osman O. Western Domination, Destructive Governance, and the Perpetual Development Crisis in the Arab Region. World review of political economy. 2024 Apr 15;15(1). Huber D, Woertz E. Resilience, conflict and areas of limited statehood in Iraq, Lebanon and Syria. Democratization. 2021 Jun 25;28(7):1–19. Gupta H. 1947 Partition of India and its lessons. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care [Internet]. 2024 Jul 26 [cited 2025 Sep 18];13(8):3471–2. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11368293/ Jong K de, van, Ford N, Kamalini Lokuge, Fromm S, Galen R van, et al. Conflict in the Indian Kashmir Valley II: psychosocial impact. Conflict and Health [Internet]. 2008 Oct 14 [cited 2025 Sep 18];2(1). Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC257762/ Project Gallery

Pathology and promising therapeutics Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link Secondary bone cancer 11/07/25, 10:52 Last updated: Published: 13/12/23, 17:27 Pathology and promising therapeutics Introduction: what is secondary bone cancer? Secondary bone cancer occurs when cancer cells spread to the bones from a tumour that started somewhere else in the body. The site where the tumour first develops is called primary cancer. Cancer cells can break away from the primary cancer, travel through the bloodstream or lymphatic system, and establish secondary cancers, known as metastasis. Bones are among the most common sites to which cancer can spread. Most type of cancer has the potential to metastasise to the bones, with the most frequent occurrences seen in prostate, breast, lung, thyroid, kidney, and myeloma cancers. Throughout the literature, secondary cancer in the bones is referred to as bone secondaries or bone metastases. The most common areas of secondary bone cancer are the spine, ribs, pelvis, humerus (upper bone of the arm), femur (upper bone of the leg) and skull. There are two main types of bone cancer referred to as osteolytic and osteoblastic metastases. In osteolytic metastases, cancer cells break down the bone, leading to significant weakening. This type of metastasis is more common than osteoblastic metastases and often occurs when breast cancer spreads to the bone. In osteoblastic metastases, cancer cells invade the bone and stimulate excessive bone cell formation. This process results in the bone becoming very dense (sclerotic). Osteoblastic metastases frequently occur when prostate cancer spreads to the bone. Although new bone forms, it grows abnormally, which weakens the overall bone structure. Hormone therapy Like primary bone cancer, treatment for secondary bone cancer includes surgical excision, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy. Treatment for secondary bone cancer aims to control the cancer growth and symptoms. Treatment depends on several factors, including the type of primary cancer, previous treatment, the number of bones affected by cancer, whether cancer has spread to other body parts, overall health, and symptoms. Breast and prostate cancers rely on hormones for their growth. Reducing hormone levels in the body can be effective in managing the proliferation of secondary cancer. Hormone therapy, also known as endocrine therapy, uses synthetic hormones to inhibit the impact of the body’s innate hormones. Typical side effects include hot flashes, mood fluctuations, changes in weight, and sweating. Bisphosphonates Bone is a dynamic tissue with a continuous process of bone formation and resorption. Osteoclasts are cells responsible for breaking down bone tissue. In secondary bone cancer, cancer cells often produce substances that stimulate the activity of osteoclasts. This leads to elevated levels of calcium in the blood (hypercalcemia), resulting in feelings of nausea and excessive thirst. Treating secondary bone cancer involves strengthening bones, alleviating bone pain and managing hypercalcaemia). One option for bone-strengthening is bisphosphonates. Bisphosphonates can be administered orally or intravenously. They have been in clinical practice for over 50 years and are used to treat metabolic bone diseases, osteoporosis, osteolytic metastases, and hypercalcaemia. These compounds selectively target osteoclasts to inhibit their function. Bisphosphonates can be classified into two pharmacologic categories based on their mechanism of action. Nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates, the most potent class, function by suppressing the activity of farnesyl pyrophosphate synthase, a key factor in facilitating the binding of osteoclasts to bone. Consequently, this interference causes the detachment of osteoclasts from the bone surface, effectively impeding the process of bone resorption. Examples of these bisphosphonates include alendronate and zoledronate. Bisphosphonates without nitrogen in their chemical structure are metabolised intracellularly to form an analogue of adenosine triphosphate (ATP), known as 5'-triphosphate pyrophosphate (ApppI). ApppI is a non-functional molecule that disrupts cellular energy metabolism, leading to osteoclast cell death (apoptosis) and, consequently, reduced bone resorption. Examples of these bisphosphonates include etidronate and clodronate. Non-nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates can inhibit bone mineralisation and cause osteomalacia, a condition characterised by bones becoming soft and weak. Due to these considerations, they are not widely utilised. Denosumab Denosumab is another option for bone strengthening. It is administered as an injection under the skin (subcutaneously). Denosumab is a human monoclonal antibody that inhibits RANKL to prevent osteoclast-mediated bone resorption. Denosumab-mediated RANKL inhibition hinders osteoclast maturation, function, and survival in contrast to bisphosphonates, which bind to bone minerals and are absorbed by mature osteoclasts. In some studies, Denosumab demonstrated equal or superior efficacy compared to bisphosphonates in preventing skeletal-related events (SREs) associated with bone metastasis. Denosumab’s mechanism of action provides a targeted approach that may offer benefits for specific populations, such as patients with renal impairment. Bisphosphonates are excreted from the human body by the kidneys. A study by Robinson and colleagues demonstrated that bisphosphonate users had a 14% higher risk of chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage progression (including dialysis and transplant) than non-users. On the other hand, denosumab is independent of renal function and less likely to promote deteriorations in kidney function. Take-home message Secondary bone cancer, resulting from the spread of cancer cells to the bones, poses challenges across various cancers. Two main types, osteolytic and osteoblastic metastases, impact bone structure differently. Hormone therapy, bisphosphonates, and Denosumab have shown promising results and offer effective management of secondary bone cancers. Ultimately, the decision between treatments should be made in consultation with a healthcare professional who can evaluate the specific clinical situation and individual patient factors. The choice should be tailored to meet the patient’s needs and treatment goals. Written by Favour Felix-Ilemhenbhio Related article: Bone cancer Project Gallery

A new theory suggests intelligence develops through reciprocal interactions between abilities Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link A primer on the Mutualism theory of general intelligence 11/12/25, 14:15 Last updated: Published: 10/10/24, 15:19 A new theory suggests intelligence develops through reciprocal interactions between abilities Introduction One of the most replicated findings in psychology is that if a sufficiently large and diverse battery of cognitive tests is administered to a representative sample of people, an all-positive correlation matrix will be produced. For a century, psychometricians have explained this occurrence by proposing the existence of g, a latent biological variable that links all abilities. G is statistically represented by the first factor derived from a correlation matrix using a method called factor analysis, which reduces the dimensionality of data into clusters of covariance between tests called factors. Early critics of g pointed out that nothing about the statistical g-factor required the existence of a real biological factor and that the overlap of uncorrelated mental processes sampled by subtests was sufficient. While the strength of correlations between subtests does generally correspond to intuitive beliefs about processes shared between them, this is not universally the case, and for this reason, sampling theory has never seen widespread acceptance. A new theory called mutualism has been proposed that explains the positive manifold without positing the existence of g. In mutualism the growth of abilities is coupled, meaning improvement in one domain causes growth in another, inducing correlations between abilities over time. The authors of the introductory paper demonstrated in a simulation that when growth in abilities is coupled the interaction between baseline ability, growth speed and limited developmental resources is sufficient to create a statistical general factor from abilities that are initially uncorrelated, offering a novel explanation for why abilities like vocabulary that are ‘inexpensive’ in terms of developmental resources explain the most variance in other abilities. Empirical evidence In the field of intelligence, mutualism has been tested twice among neurotypical children in the lab and once in a naturalistic setting with data from a gamified maths revision platform. Alongside these, a lone study exists comparing coupling in children with a language disorder and neurotypical children, however methodological issues related to attrition preclude it from discussion here. All studies used latent change score modelling (LCSM) to compare competing models of how intelligence develops over time. LCSM is a subset of structural equation modelling in which researchers compare the discrepancy between models of proposed causal connections between variables and their values in the real data using model fit indices. Three parameters resembling those used in the introductory paper’s simulations were used to represent causal connections between variables: the change score - wave #2 score minus wave #1 score of the same ability, the self-feedback parameter – the regression coefficient of baseline ability on the change score of the same ability and the coupling effect parameter – the regression coefficient of one ability at wave #1 on the change score of the other ability. The following models were compared: the g-factor model defined by the absence of coupling and growth driven by change in the g-factor, the investment model defined by coupling from matrix reasoning to vocabulary and the mutualism model defined by bidirectional coupling. Mutualism in the lab The first two lab studies investigated coupling between vocabulary and matrix reasoning in samples of 14-25 year olds and 6-8 year olds respectively. The mutualism model showed the best model fit in both studies albeit less decisively in the three wave younger sample, suggesting the stronger model fit of the first study may have been an artefact of regression to the mean. I think it’s problematic to interpret this as empirical support for mutualism due to issues that follow from only using two abilities. A g-factor extracted from two abilities may reflect specific non-g variance shared between tests as much as it does common variance caused by g. Adding to this ambiguity is the fact that the correlations between the change scores of the two tests after controlling for coupling and self-feedback effects were positive, reflecting the influence of an unmodelled third variable, be that g or unmeasured coupling. Another problematic feature of the studies comes from their model specification of the g-factor as being without coupling. This is despite the fact no latent change score modelling study of childhood development has ruled out that g may develop in a coupled or partially coupled manner. Studies using the methodology to study cognitive ageing have shown that some abilities are coupled whereas others are not suggesting that only sampling abilities that do show coupling may lead to a biassed comparison. Mutualism in the classroom Mutualism showed a marginally better fit than the investment model in explaining the development of counting, addition, multiplication and division over three years in a study featuring a sample of 12,000 Dutch 6-10 year olds using the revision platform Mathgarden. The change scores of each ability showed strong correlations after controlling for coupling and self-feedback effects. When considered in relation to the good model fit of the investment model, I believe this may reflect the standardised effect of the curriculum on the development of abilities independent of coupling and baseline ability. A finding with negative implications for mutualism from this study is the fact that the number of games played was not associated with any greater strength in coupling. This could reflect that coupling is a passive mechanism of development with little environmental input but it could equally reflect sorting of high ability students into a niche combined with self-feedback effects of their baseline ability impeding coupling. To observe the causal effect of effort on coupling after controlling for cognitive aging and the tendency of high ability people to train harder a randomised control trial of cognitive training is needed. Cognitive training Unfortunately, no cognitive training study has used latent change score modelling, meaning coupling must be inferred from the presence of far transfer (gains on untrained abilities), rather than directly estimated. COGITO’s youth sample resembled the first lab study to test mutualism in its age range and choice of fluid reasoning as a far transfer measure. Participants underwent 100 days of hour-long training sessions of working memory, processing speed and episodic memory. The authors found no near or far transfer gains for working memory and processing speed, possibly indicating developmental limits on their improvement. However, moderate effect sizes were found for fluid reasoning and episodic memory. The study’s results are lacklustre and developmentally bound but they offer an example of experimentally induced far transfer in a literature – in which it is a rarity – leaving open the possibility that the coupling effects observed in the lab studies were not mere passive effects of development. In contrast to COGITO which targeted young people at the tail end of their cognitive development, the Abecedarian Project started almost as soon as the subjects were born. Conceived of as a pre-school intervention to improve the educational outcomes of African Americans in North Carolina, the Abecedarian Project consisted of an experimental group that received regular guided educational play for infants aimed at building early language and a control condition which only received nutritional supplementation. At the entry of primary school, the experimental group showed a 7 point difference in IQ, which persisted in a diminished capacity at 4.4 IQ points by age 21. In contrast to previous early life interventions, in cognitive training studies and studies on the cognitive outcomes of adoption the gains were domain general rather than improvements on specific abilities. This provides causal evidence that if interventions are sufficiently early and target highly g-loaded abilities such as vocabulary they can induce cascades of domain-general improvement, a finding in line with the predictions of mutualism. It would be unfair to end this segment without mentioning perhaps the most standardised cognitive training regime there is: schooling. The causal effect of a year of schooling on IQ can be teased apart from the developmental effects of ageing by using a method called regression discontinuity analysis. In this method, the distance of a student’s birthday from the year cutoff for two year groups is used as a predictor variable alongside the school year in a multiple regression predicting IQ. A recent paper reanalysing data from a study using this method found that the subtest gains from a year of schooling showed a moderate negative correlation with their g loading. As mutualism states that g develops through coupling, this would lend credence to the view that coupling effects are passive mechanisms of g’s development rather than being inseparable from experience. Conclusion I believe that it’s more accurate to say there is evidence for coupling effects than it is to say there is evidence for mutualism. There is convergent evidence from a year of schooling effect, coupling effects not rising with the amount of maths games played and the COGITO intervention’s results that the environment has little causal role in coupling effects and their strength. Opposing evidence comes from the Abecedarian Project, however this is not an environmental stimulus to which most people will be exposed to. Therefore, more weight should be placed on the effects of a year of schooling because it is generalisable. To reconcile this conflicting evidence, future authors should seek to replicate the COGITO intervention in an early adolescent identical twin sample with co-twin controls. This would allow researchers to observe coupling effects while executive functions are still in development and give them a more concrete understanding of the self-feedback parameter grounded in developmental cascades of gene expression. A more readily available alternative would be to apply latent change score modelling to the Abecedarian Project dataset. I will end with a quote from a critic of mutualism, Gilles Gignac: I conclude with the suggestion that belief in the plausibility of the g factor (or mutualism) may be impacted significantly by individual differences in personality, attitudes, and worldviews, rather than rely strictly upon logical and/or empirical evidence. As the current evidence stands, this may be true, but with the availability of new developmental studies such as the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development study and old ones like the Louisville twin study there’s less of an excuse than ever. Written by James Howarth Related articles: Nature vs nurture in childhood intelligence / Does being bilingual make you smarter? REFERENCES Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A Survey of Factor-Analytic Studies . Cambridge University Press Rindermann, H., Becker, D., & Coyle, T. R. (2020). Survey of expert opinion on intelligence: Intelligence research, experts’ background, controversial issues, and the media. Intelligence , 78 , 101406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406 Spearman, C. (1904). “General intelligence,” objectively determined and measured. The American Journal of Psychology , 15 (2), 201. https://doi.org/10.2307/1412107 Thomson, G. H. (1916). A hierarchy without a general factor. British Journal of Psychology 1904-1920 , 8 (3), 271–281. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1916.tb00133.x Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g factor: The science of mental ability. Praeger Publishers/Greenwood Publishing Group Van Der Maas, H. L. J., Dolan, C. V., Grasman, R. P. P. P., Wicherts, J. M., Huizenga, H. M., & Raijmakers, M. E. J. (2006). A dynamical model of general intelligence: The positive manifold of intelligence by mutualism. Psychological Review, 113 (4), 842–861. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.113.4.842 Johnson, W., Nijenhuis, J. T., & Bouchard, T. J. (2008). Still just 1 g: Consistent results from five test batteries. Intelligence , 36 (1), 81–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2007.06.001 Project Gallery

Discussing eutrophication and industrial activities Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link How human activity impacts the phosphorus cycle Last updated: 27/12/25, 17:55 Published: 15/01/26, 08:00 Discussing eutrophication and industrial activities Phosphorus is one of the most important chemical elements in biology because it is a component of nucleic acids, ATP, and the phospholipid bilayers that make up our cell membranes. Like carbon and nitrogen, there is a limited amount of phosphorus on Earth, which is continually cycled between inorganic, organic, terrestrial, and aquatic sources. However, human activity disrupts the phosphorus cycle, resulting in some places having too much phosphorus and others having too little. This article will describe what the phosphorus cycle is and how we are affecting it. What is the phosphorus cycle? The phosphorus cycle involves phosphate ions (PO 4 3- ) moving between rocks, living organisms, and water bodies. Phosphate enters ecosystems when wind and rain break off tiny pieces of phosphate rock, primarily apatite, in a process called weathering. Weathered phosphate rock enters soil, where micro-organisms transform it into a form that plants can absorb through their roots (see my previous article on this process, called phosphate solubilisation). Plants convert inorganic phosphate into organic phosphorus compounds, such as DNA, ATP, and phosphoproteins, which are then transferred along the food chain. At each step of the food chain, phosphorus is returned to the soil by excretion from living organisms or decomposition of dead organisms. I call this the ‘organic mini-cycle’ from soil, to plants, to animals, and back to soil. Occasionally, phosphorus leaves the organic mini-cycle and enters water bodies by leaching or soil erosion. Phosphorus settles on the seabed and turns back into phosphate rock over hundreds of millions of years, completing the cycle. An overview is shown in Figure 1 . Humans disrupt the phosphorus cycle by eutrophication Deforestation, farming, and sewage overload water bodies with nutrients like phosphorus in a process called eutrophication. Agriculture is a big source of eutrophication, specifically fertilisers, organophosphorus pesticides, and animal feed. When it rains, they are carried from farm soil to water bodies by surface runoff and soil erosion. Human-caused deforestation exaggerates eutrophication because without tree roots, soil erosion increases, so more agricultural phosphorus enters water bodies. The other big eutrophication source is domestic sewage, which is dumped directly into water bodies. Fertilisers, pesticides, animal feed, and sewage provide algae with excess nutrients, so they overgrow into an algal bloom ( Figure 2 ). Algal blooms block sunlight from reaching submerged aquatic plants, so they cannot photosynthesise, and may produce toxins that kill aquatic life. Once the algal bloom dies, it is decomposed by bacteria, which use up oxygen in the water. With oxygen used up and no photosynthesis to replace it, fish and other aquatic animals die. Therefore, human phosphorus inputs like fertilisers and domestic waste can destroy aquatic ecosystems. Industrial activity depletes non-renewable phosphate rock While human activities overload water bodies with phosphorus, they deplete land of phosphate rock. Phosphate rock is mined and chemically reacted with sulfuric acid to produce fertiliser. Since phosphate rock is non-renewable, mining it permanently removes a crucial phosphorus input from the local ecosystem. 85% of phosphate rock is found in only 5 countries (China, Morocco, South Africa, Algeria, and Syria), so these countries are being depleted of phosphorus, only to overload another ecosystem with fertiliser thousands of miles away ( Figure 3 ). Scientists have suggested using agricultural waste and domestic wastewater as an alternative phosphorus source for fertiliser production. This would rebalance the phosphorus cycle on both ends: reducing the demand for non-renewable phosphate rock, and preventing eutrophication. Phosphorus can be recovered from waste and reused in fertiliser production in a variety of ways – acid leaching, isolating iron phosphate using a magnet, metal precipitation, and polyphosphate-accumulating micro-organisms, which use and store phosphate in their cells. However, the pollution and diseases present in sewage and farm waste make them difficult to recycle. Conclusion Phosphorus is an essential element for plant growth, so humans have manufactured fertilisers to provide their crops with extra phosphorus. However, fertiliser production depletes some ecosystems of phosphate rock, while fertiliser application causes eutrophication in other ecosystems. Along with domestic sewage and deforestation, agriculture has disrupted the natural cycle, which transports phosphate between plants, animals, micro-organisms, the soil, water bodies, and rocks. Therefore, making fertiliser by recycling the phosphorus in our waste products could keep the human population fed without compromising natural ecosystems. Written by Simran Patel Related article: Meet the microbes that feed phosphorus to plants REFERENCES Schipanski ME, Bennett EM. Chapter 9 - The Phosphorus Cycle. In: Weathers KC, Strayer DL, Likens GE (eds) Fundamentals of Ecosystem Science (Second Edition) . Academic Press, pp. 189–213. R. Jupp A, Beijer S, C. Narain G, et al. Phosphorus Recovery and Recycling – Closing the Loop. Chemical Society Reviews 2021; 50: 87–101. Khan MN, Mohammad F. Eutrophication: Challenges and Solutions. In: Ansari AA, Gill SS (eds) Eutrophication: Causes, Consequences and Control: Volume 2 . Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, pp. 1–15. Akinnawo SO. Eutrophication: Causes, consequences, physical, chemical and biological techniques for mitigation strategies. Environmental Challenges 2023; 12: 100733. Liu L, Zheng X, Wei X, et al. Excessive Application of Chemical Fertilizer and Organophosphorus Pesticides Induced Total Phosphorus Loss from Planting Causing Surface Water Eutrophication. Sci Rep 2021; 11: 23015. Project Gallery

Life's origins Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link The genesis of life 09/03/26, 14:46 Last updated: Published: 23/11/23, 11:22 Life's origins Did the egg or the chicken come first? This question is often pondered regarding life’s origin and how biological systems came into play. How did chemistry move to biology to support life? And how have we evolved into such complex organisms? The ingredients, conditions and thermodynamically favoured reactions hold the answer, but understanding the inner workings of life’s beginnings poses a challenge for us scientists. Under an empirical approach, how can we address these questions if these events occurred 3.7 billion years ago? The early atmosphere of the Earth To approach these questions, it is relevant to understand the atmospheric contents of the primordial Earth. With a lack of oxygen, the predominant make-up included CO2, NH3 and H2, creating a reducing environment for the drive of chemical reactions. When the earth cooled, and the atmosphere underwent condensation, pools of chemicals were made - this is known as “primordial soup”. It is thought that reactants could collide from this “soup” to synthesise nucleotides by forming nitrogenous bases and bonds, such as glycosidic or hydrogen bonds. Such nucleotide monomers were perhaps polymerised to create long chains for nucleic acid synthesis, that is, RNA, via this abiotic synthesis. Thus, if we have nucleic acids, genetic information could have been stored and passed later down the line, allowing for our eventual evolution. Note: there has now been a c hange in terminology from primordial soup, to focus on protocellular systems and the geochemically driven origin of life hypothesis. Conditions for nucleic acid synthesis The environment supported the formation of monomers for said polymerisation. For example, hydrothermal vents could have provided the reducing power via protons, allowing for the protonation of structures and providing the free energy for bond formation. Biology, of course, relies on protons for the proton gradient in ATP synthesis at the mitochondrial membrane and, in general, acid-base catalysis in enzymatic reactions. Therefore, it is safe to say protons played a vital role in life’s emergence. The eventual formation of structures by protonation and deprotonation provides the enzymatic theory of life’s origins. That is, some self-catalytic ability for replication in a closed system and the evolution of complex biological units. This is the “RNA World” theory, which will be discussed later. Another theory is wet and dry cycling at the edge of hydrothermal pools. This theory Is provided by David Deamer, who suggests that nucleic acid monomers placed in acidic (pH 3) and hot (70-90 degrees Celsius) pools could undergo condensation reactions for ester bond formation. It highlights the need for low water activity and a “kinetic trap” in which the condensation reaction rate exceeds the hydrolysation rate. The heat of the pool provides a high activation energy for the localised generation of polymers without the need for a membrane-like compartment. But even if this was possible and nucleic acids could be synthesised, how could we “keep them safe”? This issue is addressed by the theory of "protocells" formed from fatty acid vesicles. Jack Szostak suggests phase transition (that is pH decrease) allowed for the construction of bilayer membranes from fatty acid monomers, which is homologous to what we see now in modern cells. The fatty acids in these vesicles have the ability to “flip-flop” to allow for the exchange of nutrients or nucleotides in and out of the vesicles. It is suggested that clay encapsulated nucleotide monomers were brought into the protocell by this flip-flop action. Vesicles could grow by competing with surrounding smaller vesicles. Larger vesicles are thought to be those harbouring long polyanionic molecules - that is RNA - which creates immense osmotic pressure pushing outward on the protocell for absorption of smaller vesicles. This represents the Darwinian “survival of the fittest” theory in which cells with more RNA are favoured for survival. The RNA World Hypothesis DNA is often seen as the “Saint” of all things biology, given its ability to store and pass genetic information to mRNA and then mRNA can use this information to synthesise polypeptides. This is the central dogma, of course. However, the RNA world hypothesis suggests that RNA arose first due to its ability to form catalytic 3D structures and store genetic information that could have allowed for further synthesis of DNA. This makes sense when you think about how the primer for DNA replication is formed out of RNA. If RNA did not come first, how could DNA replication be possible? Many other scenarios suggest RNA evolution preceded that of DNA. So, if RNA arose as a simple polymer, its ability to form 3D structures could have allowed ribozymes (RNA with enzymatic function) within these protocells. Ribozymes, such as RNA ligase and polymerase, could have allowed for self-replication, and then mutation in primary structure could have allowed evolution to occur. If we have a catalyst, in a closed system, with nutrient exchange, then why would life’s formation not be possible? But how can we show that RNA can arise in this way? The answer to this is SELEX - selective evolution of ligands by exponential enrichment (5). This system was developed by Jack Szostak, who wanted to show the evolution of complex RNA, ribozymes in a test tube was possible. A pool of random, fragmented RNA molecules can be added to a chamber and run through a column with beads. These beads harbour some sequence or attraction to the RNA molecules the column is selecting for. Those that attach can be eluted, and those that do not can be disregarded. The bound RNA can be rerun through SELEX, and the conditions in the column can be more specific in that only the most complementary RNAs bind. This allowed for the development of RNA ligase and RNA polymerase - thus, self-replication of RNA is possible. SELEX helps us understand how the evolution of RNA in the primordial Earth could have been possible. This is also established by meteorites, such as carbon chondrites that burnt up in the earth’s atmosphere encapsulating the organic material in the centre. Chondrites found in Antarctica have been found to contain 80+ amino acids (some of which are not compatible with life). These chondrites also included nucleobases. So, if such monomers can be synthesised in a hostile environment in outer space/in our atmosphere, then the theory of abiotic synthesis is supported. Furthermore, it is relevant to address the abiotic synthesis of amino acids since the evolution of catalytic RNA could have some complementarity for polypeptide synthesis. Miller and Urey (1953) set up a simple experiment containing gas representing the early primordial earth (Methane, hydrogen, ammonia, water). They used a conduction rod to provide the electrical discharge (meant to simulate lightning or volcanic eruption) to the gases and then condensed them. The water in the other chamber turned pink/ brown. Following chromatography, they identified amino acids in the mixture. These simple manipulations could have been homologous to early life. There has lately been a new concept introduced of the thioester-RNA link, which unites the RNA world theory with the thioester world theory (which states that thioesters played a powerful role in the earliest stages of life). Recent findings suggest that the beginnings of life likely formed from both thioesters and RNA. Conclusion The abiotic synthesis of nucleotides and amino acids for their later polymerisation would support the theories that address chemistry moving toward biological life. Protocells containing such polymers could have been selected based on their “fitness” and these could have mutated to allow for the evolution of catalytic RNA. The experiments mentioned represent a small fragment of those carried out to answer the questions of life’s origins. The evidence provides a firm ground for the emergence of life to the complexity of what we know today. Written by Holly Kitley Project Gallery

What matters most for the development of intelligence in childhood? Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link Nature vs nurture in childhood intelligence 11/12/25, 14:14 Last updated: Published: 21/09/24, 16:38 What matters most for the development of intelligence in childhood? Introduction Intelligence is reasoning, planning, solving problems, thinking abstractly, comprehending complex ideas, and learning from experience. This broad and deep capacity for understanding our surroundings can be measured using standardised tests, such as Intelligence Quotient (IQ) tests, picture vocabulary tests for verbal ability and matrix reason tasks for non-verbal ability. This article explores how nature facilitates the development of intelligence in childhood through twin studies, which highlight genome-wide association studies. On the other hand, how nurture can further aid in developing intelligence in childhood through social environmental influences and investigate the association between parent socio-economic status (SES) and intelligence. However, there is no definite answer to whether only nature or nurture leads to the development of intelligence in childhood. Therefore, genotype-environment correlations are also explored. Nature Argument Nativists such as Jensen (1969) believe that intelligence is determined by nature-genetic makeup and estimate that 80% of the heritability in IQ is accounted for by genes. One way to determine the heritability of intelligence is by using twin studies. McGue and Bouchard (1998) reviewed five studies of monozygotic (MZ) twins who were reared apart and found that when accounting for heritability of intelligence, there was a correlation of 0.86 in MZ twins compared to the 0.60 correlation in dizygotic (DZ) twins. Hence, nature does play a role in the development of intelligence in childhood, because the monozygotic/MZ twins didn’t share the same environment but did share the same genes and had a higher correlation than dizygotic/DZ twins, suggesting that intelligence is heritable. Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) further investigate the relationship between genetic sequences and intelligence by examining individual chromosomal markers, such as single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Butcher et al (2008) conducted a genome scan using 7000 subjects and found six SNPs associated with intelligence, indicating that it is polygenic. The correlation between SNP-set scores and g scores is 0.105. Squaring this correlation indicates an effect size of 1.1% comparable to the sum of the effect sizes of the six SNPs. Figure 2 depicts a genotype-by-phenotype plot illustrating the relationship between SNP-set scores and standardised g . Identifying target alleles and SNP associations in genome polygenic scores has helped account for the heritability of intelligence in childhood. However, due to intelligence being polygenic, the contribution of any individual locus is small. Therefore, genomic variance only explains 10%, which makes it very difficult to detect relevant SNPS without huge samples. Foreseeable advances in genetic technology can mitigate this problem. Nurture Argument Alternatively, empiricists emphasise the family environment, socioeconomic status, and schooling, where schooling is a social influence. Sternberg et al., 2001 claim that pursuing higher education and schooling is associated with higher IQs. Dearey et al (2007), in their 5-year longitudinal study, recruited approximately 70,000 children and found a large overall contribution of intelligence to educational attainment, with an average chance of 58% of attaining grades between A and C. Therefore, their study establishes educational attainment for intelligence as an environmental outcome. However, the decision to pursue education may not be motivated by intelligence but may result from social causation, suggesting that social-economic conditions influence intelligence. The relationship between a parent's SES and a child's intelligence also exemplifies the role of nurture in the development of intelligence. This is further supported by Turkheimer et al (2003), where the authors concluded that in families with low levels of SES, 60% of the variance in IQ is explained by the shared environment, while in affluent families, all variation was accounted for by genes. However, parents with higher levels of intelligence may qualify for better-paying jobs. Hence, they have higher levels of SES, referring to social selection — when individuals influence the quality of their socio-economic environment — and genetics. Meanwhile, impoverished families do not get to develop their full genetic potential, and thus, the heritability of IQ is very low. Conversely, adoption can be seen as a social intervention that moves children from lower to higher SES homes and explores the gene-environment interplay in the development of intelligence. Kendler et al. (2015) studied 436 full male siblings, separated at birth, and tested at 18–20 years. A comparison was made between pairs of separated siblings (one raised in their biological family, the other in an adoptive family). Adopted-away siblings tested 7.6 points higher than their biological siblings when their adoptive parents had higher education levels than their biological parents (such as high school versus some postsecondary education). Gene-environment interplay According to Lerner et al. (2015), nature and nurture are inextricably linked and never exist independently of each other. In this way, the nature-nurture dichotomy presented in the title may be false. Gene-environment (GE) interplay offers two concepts: GE interaction and GE correlation. GE interaction is where the effects of genes on intelligence depend on the environment. GE correlation can be explained through adoption studies that compare genetically unrelated and related individuals. Supporting evidence from Van Ijzendoorn et al (2005) indicates that children who were adopted away from institutions had a better IQ than those children who remained in institutional care. Using 75 studies involving 3,800 children from 19 countries, a meta-analysis compared the intellectual development of children living in orphanages to those living with their adoptive families. On average, children growing up in orphanages had an IQ of 16.5 points lower than their adopted peers. This illustrates how adoptive families who typically have higher SES levels can assist children in achieving higher levels of IQ. However, the generalisability of Ijzendoorn's findings can be questioned as they used participants who were highly deprived in institutional settings, suggesting that their cognitive development is at risk. Furthermore, Neiss and Rowe (2000) contradicted Ijzendoorn’s findings by comparing adopted children to birth children to estimate the genetic-environmental effect of the mother's and father's years of education on the child's verbal intelligence. In biological families, mother-child (0.41) and father-child (0.36) correlations were significantly higher than in adoptive families (0.16). This implies that the adoptive parent's home environment has modest effects on the children's cognitive abilities, whereas the heredity and environment of the birth parents exert a profound influence. Conclusion In conclusion, both nature and nurture represent their significant role in childhood intelligence development, as they both offer testable evidence through twin studies and socio-economic correlations. Nevertheless, scientists have claimed that both genetics and environmental factors will predominantly influence the development of intelligence in childhood. This essay and future research in this field demonstrate that intelligence can be malleable, especially in children, through major social interventions and that the environment will continuously affect gene action. Written by Pranavi Rastogi Related articles: Mutualism theory of intelligence / Depression in children / Childhood stunting / Intellectual deficits / Does being bilingual make you smarter? Project Gallery

Why chirality is important in developing drugs Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link Chirality in drugs 04/02/25, 15:50 Last updated: Published: 06/06/23, 17:53 Why chirality is important in developing drugs Nearly 90% of the drugs currently on the market are racemates, which are composed of an equimolar mixture of two enantiomers, and approximately half of all drugs are chiral compounds. Chirality is the quality of an item that prevents it from superimposing on its mirror counterpart, similar to left and right hands. Chirality, a generic characteristic of "handedness,"plays a significant role in the creation of several pharmaceutical drugs. It's interesting to note that 20 of the 35 drugs the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorised in 2020 are chiral drugs. For example, Ibuprofen, a chiral 2-aryl propionic acid derivative, is a common over-the-counter analgesic, antipyretic, and anti-inflammatory medication. However, Ibuprofen and other medications from similar families can have side effects and risks related to their usage. Drugs of the chiral class have the drawback that only one of the two enantiomers may be active, while the other may be ineffective or have some negative effects. The inactive enantiomer can occasionally interact with the active enantiomer, lowering its potency or producing undesirable side effects. Additionally, Ibuprofen and other members of the chiral family of pharmaceuticals can interact with other drugs, including over-the-counter and prescription ones. To guarantee that only the active enantiomer is present in chiral-class medications, it is crucial for pharmaceutical companies to closely monitor their production and distribution processes. Lessening the toxicity or adverse effects linked to the inactive enantiomer, medical chemistry has recently seen an increase in the use of enantiomerically pure drugs. In any instance, the choice of whether to utilise a single enantiomer or a combination of enantiomers of a certain medicine should be based on clinical trial results and clinical competence. In addition to requests to determine and control the enantiomeric purity of the enantiomers from a racemic mixture, the use of single enantiomer drugs may result in simpler and more selective pharmacological profiles, improved therapeutic indices, simpler pharmacokinetics, and fewer drug interactions. Although, there have been instances where the wrong enantiomer results in unintended side effects, many medications are still used today as racemates with their associated side effects; this issue is probably brought on by both the difficulty of the chiral separation technique and the high cost of production. In conclusion, Ibuprofen and other medications in the chiral family, including those used to treat pain and inflammation, can be useful, but they also include a number of dangers and adverse effects. It's critical to follow a doctor's instructions when using these medications and to be aware of any possible interactions, allergic reactions, and other hazards. To maintain the security and efficacy of medicines in the chiral class, pharma producers also have a duty to closely monitor their creation and distribution. Written by Navnidhi Sharma Project Gallery