Blog Feed

Desireé Mack

Science and Society

                                     Why Only Five Tastes?

 I have all way wondered why Humans have the ability to taste so many things, to what limit can we taste things, and how many taste buds we have. I knew it had to do with making sure our food is not poison but I want to know more. Humans have taste buds to make a choice on what to ingest so we need our taste buds to sample the food to decide what to put in our mouths and what to ingest. When you look at your tongue you see lots of little pink bumps, and in those little pink bumps you have your taste buds. All taste buds are on the outer edges of your tongue. All taste buds can taste multiple flavors because inside them you have multiple cells to pick up the flavor. 

There are five main tastes, one for sweet, sour, savory, bitter, and salty. Animals have evolved to taste sugar to find carbohydrates for energy and a safe source for calories. Animals have evolved to taste savory things to be able to pick up the taste of protein. There are over 25 different types of bitter taste buds to pick out the things that might be toxic to eat and allows us to have enough sensitivity to taste something beneficial in the long run.  We have evolved to taste sour to protect us from eating things to sour that would throw our bodies out of whack and helps us figure out the ripeness of our food for nutritional value. Salt is very important to our biological task our bodies don’t store salt so it is very important that we find foods with salt.

• Walking up right
  
  
• Thumbs
  
  
• Ability to grasp with all five fingers
  
  
• Similar skull structure
  
  
• Round Ears

• Ingham, Richard. "Early humans had sex with chimps ." News in Science (2006): n. pag. Web. 12 Nov 2010. <http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1641443.htm>.
• Ape, . "Apes." How Stuff Works. How Stuff Works, 16 May 2008. Web. 12 Nov 2010. <http://animals.howstuffworks.com/mammals/ape-info.htm>.
• Marks, Jonathan. "What It Really Means To Be 99% Chimpanzee ."Department of Anthropology (1999): n. pag. Web. 12 Nov 2010. <http://personal.uncc.edu/jmarks/interests/aaa/marksaaa99.htm>
• MacAandrew, Alec. "Human Chromosome 2 is a fusion of two ancestral chromosomes ." Department of Anthropology n. pag. Web. 11 Nov 2010. <http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm>.
• Rodriguez, Monica. "Ask a Geneticist." Tech Museum:Stanford School of Medicine (2007): n. pag. Web. 12 Nov 2010. <http://www.thetech.org/genetics/ask.php?id=229>.
• Pbs, Science. "Evolution Frequently Asked Questions." PBS Science (2010): n. pag. Web. 12 Nov 2010. <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/faq/cat03.html>.

This lead to the antibiotic era, this was an era when antibiotics begin to develop. In this era at a point in time, antibiotics begin to be misused and overused. At that time they didn’t know that antibiotics were only effective against bacterial infections. So this did more harm than good, because by people overusing antibiotics, microbes  became smarter making immune to them. Not only did microbes become resistant they started creating strains that were more harmful. The the Antibiotic Era also led to the misuse and overuse of antibiotics used to treat very harmful infections, like the common cold, and influenza (flu). The overuse of antibiotics helped these infections and diseases become antibody resistant which is what scientist and doctors are dealing with currently. 

In modern society our way of dealing with these issues are by using vaccination, or by trying to cure them straight out. But by giving vaccinations for infections like diphtheria, chicken pox, polio, tetanus, and measles, we may be helping in the current situation, but at the same time producing strains of antibody resistant microbes. In theory this may be detrimental to our generations in the years to come. As far as scientist and doctors trying to cure diseases right from the start, there have been some issues following this as well. For example when scientist and doctors tried to stop the spread of malaria with using modern antimalarial medicine, the parasites that malaria contained, revolted against it, because it became immune to the medicine, but it also created more dangerous strands of parasites. This led to mutation of genes, which birthed even more harmful diseases such as Sickle Cell Anemia, Thalassaemias, Duffy Antigens, G6PD, and HLA and interleukin-4. Allow this is an example of just one example, this is an issue that follows the process of curing the most prominent diseases know to man, such as HIV/AIDS, and cancer. Bacteria is just becoming to smart...

In conclusion to put it simply as humans evolved with nature, so did microorganisms, and parasites. Which are still evolving as I write this blog. The real question is how will the evolution of smarter and more efficient humans lead to better engineering of preventive medicines?

Sources:

www.unmpress.com/more/0826330657.pdf

http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2009/02/darwinian-medicine-understanding-disease-in-terms-of-evolution/

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704454304575081613327728110.html

http://www.cdc.gov/MALARIA/

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1224522/?tool=pmcentrez

It has long been asked if there is such thing as an Addictive Personality. As you’ve grown up perhaps you’ve noticed some of your friends have become dependent on substances like caffeine or nicotine. But is this just a personality trait, or something more? Research has shown that it could be rooted in one’s DNA. According to research done at the University of Utah, an ‘addiction gene’ wouldn’t mean that someone is bound to become addicted, but rather “it may be harder for people with certain genes to quit once they start.”  

In recent studies, and Alcoholic gene, DRD2, “was present in more than two-thirds of 35 deceased alcoholics, whereas it appeared only in one-fifth of 35 deceased non-alcoholics.” This confirms that if a parent is an alcoholic, it is more likely for their children to be alcoholics as well.  According to Web MD, the genetic trait is considered a deficiency. It seems to have no contributing factor to our species survival. Additionally no scientist has presented a strong theory on why the gene developed in the first place, beside it being a random genetic mutation.

 In the same way that the 'Fat Gene' shouldn't be a scapegoat for obesity, the 'Addiction Gene' shouldn't allow the addicted to use this as an excuse for their condition. There is, of course, no cure for our own genes. The only thing that can be done is to avoid easily abused substances in the first place.

Venom itself also evolved, its toxins and proteins being reborn from other proteins in tissues throughout the snake’s body. snake-venom toxins were derived originally from proteins in the brain, eye, lung, heart, liver, muscle, mammary gland, ovary and testis. By tweaking the proteins from other body tissues, snakes developed a way to create more specific and highly potent toxins.

Venom is still evolving today in medicine, having a beneficial effect on the body. For example, some poisons reduce blood pressure so quickly that the victim dies. But by changing and reproducing some components in venom, scientists can make a drug that reduces blood pressure.

If humans were evolved from monkeys, why don't we have more similar physical characteristics? In the diagram of evolution, chimps are the most closely related organism to humans. According to National Geographic, scientist’s found that humans are 96 percent similar to the great ape species. Scientist Frans de Waal at Emory University states, “Darwin wasn't just provocative in saying that we descend from the apes—he didn't go far enough." He also states, "We are apes in every way, from our long arms and tailless bodies to our habits and temperament." Scientists have actual proof of the genetic relationship between human and chimp.

Humans and chimps have a high degree of genetic similarity. Proteins are usually responsible for organism’s anatomical, psychological and behavioral characteristics.

The African Wildlife Foundation informs us that chimpanzees’ use of “sticks to collect ants and termites from their nests, and rocks to smash open nuts” draws a relationship between a human and chimp’s ability use “cognitive thinking to problem solve.” Similarities are drawn also in physical characteristics. The chimpanzee is known to be “Noisy and curious, intelligent and social” just like humans. The percentage of DNA identity between human and chimp is extensive.  However, the percentage is not 100% leaving room for physical distinctiveness between the two organisms.  Humans and chimps have a strong facial resemblance. According to the American Museum of Natural History, humans and chimps descended from the same ancestor species six or seven million years ago. The DNA of both organisms, passed from generations, changed. Many of these DNA changes led to changes in behavioral and physical appearance.

For more information, visit:

1. http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/permanent/humanorigins/past/dna.php

2. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/05/0520_030520_chimpanzees.html

3. http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/13842/the_similarities_and_differences_between.html

4. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/0831_050831_chimp_genes.html

5. http://www.awf.org/content/wildlife/detail/chimpanzee

It is said that extinction is a natural occurrence in evolution. Even though this is true, scientist believe that we should still save some species because they are dying before evolution can happen. The extinction of just one species can have a drastic impact on many other species. The only way protecting endangered species could be considered tampering with evolution is by killing species faster than evolution. As said by PBS, “No species exists in a vacuum”, no one species is isolated so every species has an effect on the other.

In today’s society there are many organizations working to save endangered species. These organizations realized that all species play a role in another’s life. If we were to lose a large number of one species there will be no food for the species that feed on them. Which would lead to the death of several species until we are all gone.

Many think of saving endangered species as tampering with evolution as said by Sheila Conant, Professor, and Department of Zoology University of Hawaii.  She believes that the endangerment of species is a natural process. She says this because a majority of the time species becomes endangered because their habitat has inadequate food quality or amount. This lowers the chances of an animal’s reproduction, and survival.

When we move an animal for instance moving polar bears to America because the are endangered that is an example of tampering with evolution because we are removing the species from its natural habitat, which is tinkering with its food, and natural reproduction abilities.

Questions

 - Since we believe animals evolve, why  aren't new species with similar but better characteristics created from evolution before extinction occurs?

- Is it possible to speed up the process of evolution?

- Do species become extinct not just because they can't survive in the present conditions but because they have no chance of survival in the future ?

Sources
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/faq/cat08.html#Q03
http://jhered.oxfordjournals.org/content/101/4/437.abstract
http://www.jstor.org/pss/1310848

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20332163

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evo_02

I am inspired by details.  Once I have arrived at a concept of what I will create, I am from the outset of the creation of a piece, highly intuned to the precise placement of each element in that piece. Deciding how each color relates to the other, complements the other and bounces off one another is taken into consideration along with the strategic placement of the items. One of my favorite things to do is take an object, pull it out of its element, and give it a new perspective. Then, the purpose of the object is completely different. It may or may not be useful, but it will always evoke some type of emotion.

I like to use natural elements, and shape and twist them into something that they were not intended for. I feel that the piece will emit a more honest vibe, if it was created from something that people may see everyday, but never truly appreciate. With this approach, it is sometimes hard to envision how the final product will turn out, but I don't really mind. I feel that the piece will always turn out to be how it was meant to. I'm just helping it complete its aesthetic purpose. I see myself as an aide in helping people recognize the true potential and beauty in commonplace objects.

The process of creating a piece, rather than the actual final product is what is most important to me. For instance, if painting, I am more likely to slowly and carefully paint each color that butts up against another than paint one color over top of the other. I would much rather go through the process of creating a close detail-oriented piece of work, than just have the overall piece be quick, easy and generally aesthetically pleasing. And although not intended, the result of such close detail work is that when someone looks at a piece, it may seem basic at first, but on closer inspection the details begin to show themselves. Someone would have to really be paying attention, in order to truly appreciate my work.

Bottle Cap Poster

An artist named Aurora Robson has been creating pieces from plastic bottle caps for some time now. We learned about her in class and about why and how she creates these pieces. Most of them are reflective of images from nightmares that she used to have. Not coincidentally, since they are made from plastic bottle caps, (which can not be recycled) they share a common element with her audience, as we all share in the nightmare of how we are destroying the Earth with our nonchalant overuse of plastic. Our class was planning to visit Aurora and her new exhibit, and we wanted to be helpful to her cause. So, for our first project we were to create a poster informing people that the art room would be collecting bottle caps.

Science & Society

First Quarter Benchmark

Research Question: How much information do fossils indicate about a species evolution? Do they tell the whole story?

Based on this information one would think that fossils are probably the most reliable source of evolution. That is not true. Over time, fossil records have been misinterpreted and have not been able to tell the whole story of evolution. Scientist have been able to point out gaps in fossil record history, proving that some fossil theories are invalid. They say that fossil records fail to illustrate what are called “Transitional Forms” which are the in-between stages of a creature that evolved into another.

Fossil records surely do have gaps because of the conditions required to create fossils have been rare ever since life began on earth. A small percentage of animals that have lived and died have become fossils. Many puzzles of the pieces are missing and some may not be found. With that being said, scientists have been able to discover the evolutionary transitions between fish and amphibians, reptiles and mammals, dinosaurs and birds, and lineages such as whales and horses. Fossils have always proved to show existence, but it’s not consistent in showing evolution.

When we look at a fossil it doesn’t tell use where it came from or how it was formed. That why fossils still allow us to ask questions about its origin, we can suggest answer these questions by discovering circumstantial evidences.

Ever since early man, meat has been a part of humans diets. Of course 5 million years ago meat probably wasn't as carefully prepared as it is now. Through out the 5 million years of our existence we have gained a few tools to aid us in consuming and digesting meat. First we gained two sets of teeth, one set on the upper row of teeth, and one set on the lower set of teeth that are sharper than others and help tear meat, we have also gained the ability to digest carbohydrates and fats better. 

In a study done by the University Medical Center in Dallas Texas, there are some characteristics that humans have that also resemble those of plant eating species. Most carnivorous species have small intestines that are around 3 times their body length, and most herbivorous species have small intestines that are around 12 times their body length and humans small intestines are closer in length to those of herbivores species. 

If humans as a whole began to cut meat out of their diets a few things would began to change, the sets of sharpened teeth would no longer be needed so they would begin to fade away through the generations. Also humans would possibly lose their ability to digest fats and carbohydrates as well, which would mean carbohydrates would become less common. 

After looking over the various tools and adaptations humans have gained in order to consume and digest meat, it has become apparent that if those tools and adaptations aren't used they will begin to show less and less in newer generations. Which means that humans will begin to lose the teeth that we have gained to help us eat meat. 

Here are some links that aided me in my research

http://www.rense.com/general20/meant.htm

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/02/0218_050218_human_diet.html

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/674/are-humans-meat-eaters-or-vegetarians-by-nature

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4122-meat-eating-is-an-old-human-habit.html

While doing this research I began to form a question in my head that seems to me would be interesting to research, why can't humans just live off of fruit? A lot of fruits can give us the necessary sugars needed for survive, and for all of the other necessities humans can just rely on vegetables? Just a thought.

           In the 21^st century, many humans wonder why Penguins are so unique.  James Randerson says  " They have a dinner-suit plumage and waddling gait, penguins are among the most unusual and endearing members of the bird kingdom." Something has caused penguins to change.  The scientific community has researched the changes, finding evidence that supports the Penguins evolution. In the beginning, scientists believed that penguins evolved from a flying bird that dated back to 150-million-year-old Archaeopteryx. According to Bnet.com, Ornithologists agree that, "Their closest living relatives appear to be an albatross, the graceful, soaring birds celebrated for their ocean-spanning trips in search of food for their young, says Marcel van Tuinen." Why is it that Penguins can not fly and how have they evolved?