The Future of Science Starts Now

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is.

Speaker 2 (00:03):
Twists. This Week in Science, episode number ten twenty recorded
on Wednesday, June twenty fifth, twenty twenty five. The Future
of Science starts. Now, Hey everybody, I'm doctor Keiki and
we're here to fill your head with verra, some ex

(00:26):
dragon dude, and brilliant brains. But first, thanks to our
amazing Patreon sponsors for their generous support of Twists. You
can become a part of the Patreon community at patreon
dot com. Slash This Week in Science.

Speaker 3 (00:42):
Thiscclamor disclaimer disclaimer. The following program contains scientific stories about
recent research performed by actual scientists and then published for
public review. None of the stories are based on doing
my own research, or a friend of a friend told me,
or I read somewhere, or the US Department of Health

(01:06):
and Human Services says. Instead, we bring you a slightly
curated selection of authenticated works in science, guarantee or generated
by working scientists using scientific methods, based on scientific method Remember,
if for any reason you find the findings of any

(01:27):
particular story not to your liking, you are but one
of billions of biological bipedal beings bopping about on the
planet orbiting a nuclear fireball. For a very limited span
of time, and certainly you can spend this opportunity of
being alive concerning yourself with something more noble than science denial,

(01:48):
unless you really can do your own research, in which case,
challenge those results, design an experiment and put it to
the test, and maybe we'll talk about it on This
Week in Science coming up next.

Speaker 4 (02:04):
I've got the kind of mind I can't get enough.
I want to learn everything. I want to fill it
all up with new discoveries. It happen every day of
the week. There's only one place to go to find
the knowledge.

Speaker 2 (02:18):
Zeque.

Speaker 1 (02:18):
I want to know what's happen the los Lots happened
this week in sciences. Lots happenings happened this week in science.

Speaker 2 (02:36):
Good science to you, Kiki and Blair, and a good
science to you too, Justin Blair and everyone out there.
Welcome to another episode of This Week in Science. Thank
you so much for joining us for this adventure through
this new I don't know place of science and things

(02:59):
that we want to know about. People are asking questions
and figuring out how to figures exam that they're sharing
it and oh yeah.

Speaker 3 (03:07):
We're going to talk about it. There's so much. It's
like it's really almost kind of ridiculous at this point
that we aren't pouring all of our resources globally into
science at this moment because there are just untold advances

(03:27):
being made that we're seeing, we're seeing indications of being
able to cure I've got like potentially two major cures
here to talk about today, one one in cancer, one
type one diabetes. But there's every week there are a
slew of really really promising experiments being done that are

(03:53):
showing what we can do with our current level of
technology and methods and science. And it's astounding, and I'm
just going to help.

Speaker 2 (04:03):
It's astounding.

Speaker 3 (04:05):
And you know, I.

Speaker 2 (04:07):
Go through and I look for all sorts of new
things and try to see what's going on in the world.
I have this keep that is just packed with all
of the things I think are interesting, but we don't
even get to I gets a little tiny smidgeon of

(04:30):
all the things that I look at throughout the week
that we end up talking about, and that's a smidgeon
of the big things that are all out there in
the world. Oh my gosh. So anyway, everyone, if you're
here to find out what's going on, in a way
that's like, Yo, we're all here just to talk about
it and learn about it and share and ask questions.

(04:52):
Make sure that you invite your friends and other people
to join us for this conversation and let them know
that you can find us wherever guests and live streams
are found YouTube, Facebook, Twitch, and Okay, this week on
the show, I could talk about how the Housing and

(05:12):
Urban Development Department is going to be kicking NSF out
of the beautiful building that it's in and taking over
floors and pushing without actually a plan for where they're
going to go. I could talk about actually some good
news related to judge decisions that have negated some of

(05:37):
the clawbacks related to funding for grants that have given
to scientists. But I could also talk about some weird
language that is related to like Wartime False Claims Act
stuff that is being added to the nih NSF grant acceptance.
It's like the terms. You know, you always have to
read the terms of service, right, don't you?

Speaker 3 (06:00):
I only ever clicked? Is that bad?

Speaker 2 (06:05):
Yeah? So the the fault they're they're inserting language that
potentially allows uh, not just the DOJ or government entities
to decide that you have used words or uh or
like gone against regulations that have been put in place
through executive orders, but also that external entities could sue

(06:29):
the university and sue your lab if you know, you
take this money, you're basically like anyone can sue me
if I say d E I. And so there's a
lot of questions right now about how universities and researchers
are going to be dealing with that stuff. There's so
much going on, but I want you to know there

(06:51):
is a whole world of researchers who are working to
keep an eye on how funding is being used, how
it is, how things are being broken, and how we're
going to keep pathways into science working so that science
is not debilitated as much as we think it might be.

(07:12):
There is an article out this last week in American
Scientist by the Shark scientist David Schiffman, who he's he's
written an article that basically for anybody who wants to
talk to people about why we funded that, that's the
name of the article. So it's all reasoning behind how
funding in science works, how decisions are made, and why

(07:35):
things that kind of like basic science and other things
that when you're talking about fruit flies or tarte grades
or weird things that politicians sometimes make fun of because
they don't really understand and they're trying to make a
political point. This is a it's a really great article
to help people actual talk to people about how it

(07:58):
all works in the way that we need to, which
is compassionate.

Speaker 3 (08:02):
That is that Tea Party politician, lady who've also ran
as vice president once what was her name? That I
could see Russia from her house.

Speaker 2 (08:11):
I don't want to talk about her.

Speaker 3 (08:13):
The point was, though, that this politician used an example
of exactly that, a fruit fly study.

Speaker 2 (08:20):
It was the fruitflies. That's why I brought it.

Speaker 3 (08:21):
Up as a as a waste of scientific money, even
though that research was fundamental and in something that affected
one of her immediate family members directly, and and that
that lack of connection, you're right is, does need to
get made better. So that's a very exciting article. This
shrek fella you're talking about that.

Speaker 2 (08:43):
So I think just this week it was it was
open access. It'll go back behind a paywall pretty soon,
so hopefully we'll I hope it's still out there because
I think this kind of conversation is very important and honestly,
I'm going to keep pushing it the way we like
to talk with you science. All of everyone who's here
with us right now, we all need like Blair has

(09:08):
for years talked about talking about climate change and how
we needed to talk about it, and just talking about
it is part of it. So all of us need
to find ways to talk about the importance of science
to society, to our economy, to the future. So just
putting it out there, everybody. But we're not going to

(09:28):
do those things right now. The stories that we're bringing
tonight to the show are super fun. So I want
to talk about Vera and how she first looked. I'm
also going to talk about some anthrobots and and you know,
talk about how old they are. Blair, I have a

(09:50):
bodybot pod for you. And then I really really really
want to talk about glowing brains.

Speaker 5 (09:59):
Body. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (10:02):
I made up that term because it kind of like it.
I liked it.

Speaker 5 (10:08):
That sounds bad, sounds like something I would not like.

Speaker 2 (10:13):
I know, it's just for you and I can't wait
to share it. Justin what are you bringing? You've got
some cures and what else? What's going on?

Speaker 3 (10:22):
Yeah, I've got Denise Evin story that's going to be
kind of interesting. Also, yeah, I've got this is a
couple of these are like early stage research that looks
promising that may end up falling through because every trial
has like a forty to eighty percent drop off rate

(10:44):
between stages of trials, So even when you start with
something that looks like very promising, it may not be
at the end. However, profer concept of both of these
is pretty solid, and it looks like cancer cures diabetes. Here,
these sorts of things are very much on our horizon,
even if these specific ones don't make it. So, so

(11:09):
that's gonna be some fun stuff talk about. And then
I don't know, we can talk about microbes having circulatory systems,
like clusters of microbes.

Speaker 5 (11:18):
Having circulatory systems.

Speaker 2 (11:21):
Can't wait talk about that.

Speaker 3 (11:22):
We could talk about the fact that they need to
study women more because there's there's very sex specific pathways
related to cancer and they're understudied.

Speaker 2 (11:40):
I had no idea.

Speaker 3 (11:41):
I almost want to jump into this because of your disbelief, but.

Speaker 2 (11:46):
We will wait. You have to hold off. Everybody wants it,
but they all ever have to wait. Sorry to be
such a tease. Okay, Blair, what's in the animal corner.

Speaker 5 (12:00):
Hey, I have shark skin, I have orcas using tools,
and I have octopus suckers. You know, the really hard
hitting important stuff.

Speaker 4 (12:11):
Thank you.

Speaker 2 (12:13):
I can't wait. This is what we need. We need,
we need the heart. This is the hard, soft, it
is the enjoyable, it is the I can't wait for
you to bring up bring up something and us to
actually be like what and have a debate about it.
So anyway, in our tight ninety I just want to
let everyone know once again, our website is twists dot

(12:37):
org and you can find information on show notes there
and also you can join our Patreon community at that
place to support the show in an ongoing fashion, which
is super helpful in these times. Additionally, our Zazzle stores there,
so you can go to twist dot org find the
zazzlelink and be able to find awesome Twist goods, a

(12:58):
lot of them designed by Blair, which is super cool.
I think that's amazing. And then once again, subscribe, subscribe, subscribe,
find us wherever we are. We're everywhere, but we're not
big brother, We're like big sister. We share anyway, mm

(13:19):
you guys ready for the show? Yes? Nodding heads, Yes,
let's do We're We're all here. It's so good, so
I want to start with a first look. So this
week the National Science Foundation and Department of Energy and

(13:44):
the Mira c Ubin Observatory and scientists who have been
involved in developing the camera. The LSST camera that has
is the camera in the Via Sea Ruben Observatory in Chile.

(14:06):
This is the biggest camera on the planet. It's super cool.
So it's a camera that is made up of three
point two billion pixels. The resolution three point two billion pixels.
This is the biggest ever built for astronomy. They have
like special coolers to make sure that because like the

(14:28):
the CCD and little pixels in the CEA, the way
it works, they get hot and so they have to
have to manage the noise from just the digital act
like the heating of things. So they have to get
rid of those little artifacts. And they have all sorts
of algorithms that are working there. And for a long
time it was this the Vera se Rubin Observatory that's

(14:51):
in the ANDES was going to be called the Large
Synoptics Survey Telescope, and that's what it was going to be.
And then somebody was like we should like do and
so it's now the Vera S. Rubn Observatory. The camera
is still the LSST, but it is not the same acronym.

(15:13):
They've repurposed the acronym again. It's very it's fascinating, it's
got a long history. We've been talking about the LLST
for a very long time. Monday, they released images from
the very first look, so every observatory telescoop they put
them out, remember j Whist. The first look they showed

(15:34):
the calibration of the camera of the observatory and how
how there was like a starlike pattern on points of
light that indicated that things were being calibrated correctly. So
this particular observatory has done just a little teeny tiny observation,

(15:58):
ten hours of observation. The survey eventually is going to
observe forty billion stars, galaxies and celestial objects. It's going
to be every night, all night, and it's going to

(16:18):
be looking at you know, it's Chile, so it's more
of a Southern hemisphere observatory, so it's going to complement
observatories that we have in other areas of the planet.
It's controlled by an automated system it's this. It's really
an amazing feat of international collaborate collaboration and engineering. The

(16:40):
camera itself, which is giant, was developed at Slack, Stanford
and was moved from Stanford down to Chile, and it
is a massive like sixty ton camera is super huge,
and the observatory is supposed to be able to see

(17:02):
about ten million changes every night in the night sky,
being able to look at transient phenomena to be able
to determine little changes. And then the uh triangulation and
corroboration of other telescopes and other observatories throughout throughout our

(17:25):
systems around the globe are going to be working as well.
You want to see some pictures from the Ruben Yeah, okay,
so we've got the vera Uben Treasure treasure chest here.
Oh wait, where to go? It went away? Did my
picture not come up before when I was showing the

(17:46):
picture of the sixty ton camera, No.

Speaker 5 (17:49):
We could see it.

Speaker 2 (17:50):
Okay, good, all right, So we have this video that
zooms out and pans around showing ten million galaxies. This
is an image that was taken within about ten minutes.
This is made from eleven hundred images captured by the

(18:12):
eight vrsc Ruben Observatory zoomed out back in and this
is about zero point zero five percent of the galaxies
that are going to be observed during its expected ten
year survey, little tenny piece of the universe. The Virus

(18:45):
Reuben Observatory has already identified asteroids. It's already identified in
its ten minutes of observations seven near Earth asteroids not
dangerous to us, two one, and four asteroids that have

(19:09):
never been seen before. It's going to be looking for
ten years, and it is expected to give us an
unparalleled understanding of the Milky Way and the Yeah, the
space around us.

Speaker 3 (19:27):
I don't understand anything about the science behind. But that
looks like that looks like a Hubble deep field view
taken from Earth, which.

Speaker 2 (19:38):
Is taken from That's like I didn't even think it.

Speaker 3 (19:42):
Was possible to take it from within the atmosphere, been
at night, even in Chile. I didn't think you would
be able to get images like this.

Speaker 2 (19:54):
Yeah, so there was a question about the CCD. The
CCD is the it's three point two gigapixels. It's a
mosaic and like I said, there's a cryostat that keeps
it cool to make sure that there is no uh no,
there's less noise from Oh interesting, so uh stream yard

(20:18):
has changed how things move around. So there are multiple
lenses because and filters this is another aspect. There are
these massive filters that can be put in place and
they take you know, a like two minutes three minutes
for the filter to change. So if you want to
take a filter and do a different uh you know,

(20:40):
different color spectrum, a different light spectrum, uh to be
to be collected by the c c D, then you
they have a number of filters that I'm imagining it
kind of like, you know, this circular filter mechanism that
can move around. But the various lenses are part of

(21:01):
the system that corrects for atmospheric distortion altogether. Though there
are algorithms that have been used for years and are
constantly being improved to be able to make up for
things like satellites and atmospheric distortion in the images. To
kind of get rid of that noise. Once again, there's

(21:22):
the cristat to make sure the CCD is itself taking
the most accurate record of the light that has hit it.

Speaker 5 (21:34):
Yeah, that's kind of that's what I was going to ask.
So this is the kind of like touched up version
is what we just saw, right.

Speaker 2 (21:42):
Yeap post. Yeah, they've taken the pictures and this is
like it's so it's kind of like you have the
image that your camera takes with the CCD, and then
camera itself itself has algorithms that give you the picture
from the CCD, and then you take that've been put

(22:03):
it on your computer and you've got light room or
you know, some other software to like juge.

Speaker 5 (22:09):
Okay, because so, so how long did it take for
them to capture this image that we just looked at?

Speaker 2 (22:16):
So this is ten minutes, okay, and.

Speaker 5 (22:20):
Then however long it took them to touch it up.
So this is this is going to be a pretty
prolific camera because you know, it's not like it took
two days, it took ten minutes. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (22:31):
So I've switched over to the last Vera Ruben image
that was shared, and so this is a region of
the sky in the Milky Way that includes Mesa, some
other Milky Way stars, a lot of them haven't been
seen before. This image is one point six times the

(22:51):
area that the Ruben captures each time it takes an image.
So this is this is a wide field twenty five
K pixel image, this particular image that we're looking at, and.

Speaker 5 (23:07):
Because of the different filters, you said the colors are
those true? Are those the colors that they actually are?

Speaker 2 (23:17):
So it's it's uh no, so that no, this is
not the colors they actually are. This is this is
going to be enhanced, got it in terms of the light.
But what this is, this is light reaching a you know,
a light accepting CD c CD. So this is photons, right,

(23:39):
But because we've got such a big c CD, such
an accurate CCD, it's it's really so if you imagine
astrophotography and the time that you sit and look at it,
then the more light you let in at a particular

(24:00):
you know, aperture and fool, the more light you let in,
the more information can be brought into that one particular file.
And so a lot of this is going to be
multiple images layered over each other.

Speaker 3 (24:20):
That's like the whole thing. Like we're on a moving
planet and the Solar System's spinning. Like one of the
benefits of being in the space is you could point
out a thing and stay pointed at it and get
those really long exposures for deep But I guess if
you if you find the same stretch of sky every
night and shoot your camera every night for a few hours,

(24:44):
you know, or this one's ten minutes. My gosh, they
got so much that maybe maybe you don't have to
be in space to do this. And if anything goes wrong, hey,
we don't need a space mission or a wor work
around that ignores some of the sensors we have in
place to fix it because it's on the planet, which

(25:06):
makes that a lot easily.

Speaker 2 (25:07):
Wait, I said ten minutes. Ten hours. I'm sorry. Ten
hours makes so much more than I'm so sorry I
said ten hours.

Speaker 3 (25:18):
And now it's just a camera.

Speaker 2 (25:22):
But it's an extreme long exposure. And the way that
the camera works is it can be uh can be
like guided, so it is tracking a particular section of
the night sky exactly right, so there isn't like the
star trail kind of issue. You're tracking at the rate

(25:42):
that the Earth is. The camera's moving, yes, so as
the Earth is rotating, the camera is moving to make
sure it can keep keep an eye on whatever it's
looking at. There's some other images that are really cool,
the Triffid lagoons. They've put a whole bunch of images

(26:03):
together that each of the filters were able to get
different things dust and guests and other stuff and be
able to put these the different images together. There are
also images of these nebula alongside other stars. And one
of the fascinating things that we're going to see is

(26:25):
taking this Earth observatory and combining it with what j
Whist can do, so where vera is looking and it's
what it wants to be looking at, Like one of
the things things is looking at pulsars, Lira variable stars.

(26:47):
It's going to be detecting these stars out to a
million light years away and hopefully giving us an idea
of the galactic halo and how it interacts with the
dramedic galaxy. But this is stuff that can also be
connected with what jay Whist is looking at, which, by

(27:08):
the way, just detected its very first, very own exoplanet
around the start, which is super cool, not just confirming
other ones. So anyway, it's super cool. They've done a
lot of work and now we're taking pretty pretty pictures that,
like you said, they're like this is like hubble quality.

(27:29):
This is how is this? Where's the atmosphere? Where's all
the well there used to be this whole.

Speaker 5 (27:37):
Oh, it's hard to.

Speaker 2 (27:38):
Take pictures from Earth. This is amazing, it's beautiful.

Speaker 3 (27:43):
Now we've got questions about variable stars though, wait, wait,
how why are they variable?

Speaker 2 (27:48):
Because they have a variable pulsating race.

Speaker 3 (27:54):
Star I don't understand.

Speaker 2 (27:57):
Because they're like our star rotates, right, it has its
own rotation. The Sun rotates, and so depending on sources,
like what kind of star it is like other there's I.

Speaker 3 (28:19):
Didn't know that. I mean, I know it's moving. I
know it's moving. You know where the solar system is spinning,
and then it's moving in some direction. But I didn't
know it rotated. Hu lins something every day, My.

Speaker 2 (28:37):
Goodness, I like to learn something every day. Kind of
cool anyway, So this is one of those wonderful, wonderful,
wonderful things that gives us a galactic scale view. And

(28:59):
for me this is NSFDOE. But it's also a collaboration
with universities across the country, around the world, and also
research institutions governments around the world. This is one of
the things that brings people together. I feel so small,

(29:22):
but it gives me such a great wonder as to
the importance of the fact that we're here in the
first place. How magical. Let's learn more. Okay, tell me
something else. I want to learn something new, justin.

Speaker 3 (29:38):
To talk about stuff. So yeah, I don't know if
you remember dragon man I do. This was a skull
that apparently somebody hid, somebody found it in like the
nineteen teens, early nineteen or whatever, twentieth century, and then

(30:01):
they just had this giant skull hanging around, and then
the Japanese in China, and then the Japanese had attacked
at some point during I guess World War two, and
then this individual who had the skull hit it at
the bottom of a well and left in their will like,

(30:22):
oh yeah, by the way, I hit a giant skull
in the bottom of the well. And apparently like the
grandchild like heard this family story enough times that they're like,
I'm gonna go look in the well, and they dug
out of this old well. This skull.

Speaker 6 (30:40):
It was there.

Speaker 3 (30:42):
So it's got all the problems of not being in situ,
no providence. They don't know where it was found. How
can you date such a thing. But they did manage
to and they put it to at about one hundred
and forty something thousand years old. This skull and dragon
Man was called there's also homologie and they've kind of like,

(31:06):
you know, it's it's sort of an outlier. I think
it's one of the larger skulls that we've we've ever found.

Speaker 2 (31:11):
It's it's you know, pretty complete, was homology like they
this is a new thing, homolongey or were there other examples.

Speaker 3 (31:21):
They know it's a new thing, but they don't know
where it fits into the old things that we were,
you know, the other old things. So they don't know
and you know, the is this is this a late
stage homo erectus. China has quite a diversity of hominin
fines actually, so there's you know, it could be anywhere

(31:44):
along a long lineage of Well, they managed to uh
do some extractions from teeth and from other bone regions
where they normally get DNA, and they got no DNA,
so the mystery continues.

Speaker 5 (32:06):
But then all got washed off in the well, right.

Speaker 3 (32:10):
Well it's like buried in there like over time like this.
It's the ancient DNA is very you know, hard to extract.
When you do, you're you're just kind of lucky. Anyway,
So this time though, they managed to get some proteins
and some DNA from dental calculus. So thanks to homolonging

(32:35):
not not brushing because that hadn't been invented yet, apparently
they managed to extract some DNA, some maternal DNA, and
just enough with about three different signals in there that
suggest that this was variants unique to Denise of it.

(33:02):
So we now have perhaps the face of the Denisian,
and they've done some past reconstructions of different styles on
dragon Man to see what they might look like. But
and unfortunately we don't have like a lot of DNA,

(33:23):
We just have enough to say it's definitely, definitely has
variants that share in common with all the other Denisians
that we found, or at least some of them. So
this is a huge breakthrough in the whole you know
that Now now we can start thinking about perhaps that

(33:43):
diversity of ancient hominin that is found in China, maybe
that miss the hidden Denisian UH fossils that we've been
looking for this time, although many of them are going
to go back a little bit further than Neanderthal or
anything like this anyway, So so this may still be

(34:07):
a homo erectous ancestor late you can call it. Late
existing home, this descendant, what have you. But it's really
intriguing that they've that they've now found the a skull
of a Denise ban We've gotten jah, we've got finger bones,

(34:27):
we've got some other little hints here and there. We
have some other potentials that are laying out there that
still needs some DNA to be able to be confirmed.
But the fact that they got it from the den
with calculus is also going to raise, uh, you know,
the possibility that we've missed this method of extraction in
other places.

Speaker 2 (34:49):
It really really fascinating, I think I think this is
so interesting because originally they hadn't with dragon Man it
was morphological and they hadn't gotten DNA, and so so
they're like, oh, it looks kind of different and it's
got to be different, and it's here and it's not
near these other places. So it's it's this new thing.

(35:12):
But so far with Denise Evans, it's been like a
fingerbone or a little bit of a jawbone, like we've
had nothing that we've created these this dire species subspecies,
right Denisovans. Now we have a face.

Speaker 3 (35:31):
When we don't know.

Speaker 5 (35:31):
Where that thing came from. Really, because if it was
some sort of group burial site, we could have so
much material. If it was near a village, we could
have a bunch of material.

Speaker 3 (35:42):
This is not this is just this part is like
I heard somewhere. I seem to remember that it had
been found in a river.

Speaker 2 (35:54):
Wasn't the well near a river? You told us this
whole story on like one of our reviews.

Speaker 3 (36:00):
And so my memory from that far back isn't as
good as it used to be.

Speaker 2 (36:08):
I remember, I remember the story that you told was
something about the harper or somebody who left and they
found the skull, but then there was something about like
a war or something coming and so they hit it.

Speaker 3 (36:22):
Yeah, so it was that part of the story is
right since here the cranium was reportedly discovered in the
nineteen thirties, so a little later in Harbor City of
helio Jiang Province in China, so it doesn't say anything
about a river there, So maybe it wasn't found in
the river in the first place.

Speaker 5 (36:42):
It's I mean, and it's all kind of hearsay at
that point, right, because the chain of the city is
so brooke, it doesn't you have no idea what it
could have come from anywhere at all.

Speaker 3 (36:52):
Yes, correct, it could have just it have.

Speaker 5 (36:55):
Come from another country, you know, it could it could
have come from anywhere.

Speaker 3 (37:00):
It could come from anywhere. But that the fact that
it's coming from East Asia. I mean, if this was
found in Britain, it would really be right alarm bells
that you would have this Denise now confirmed Denisovan link
in something so far afield. But this is right where

(37:21):
you would expect to find a Denisovan, right, this is
East Asia. This is in some of the areas with
the highest existing Denisan DNA still in current modern humans
only only Oceania as as more I think than than
East Asia. So so really exciting, really exciting now, But

(37:44):
now the question is, right, is it a Denisovan or
a Homolongee? Because technically was founded, found and described first.
I don't know when they tagged homolonge as a name,
but if it's if it's first, it's first, and that's

(38:04):
usually how that goes.

Speaker 5 (38:07):
Not really like all of dinosaur naming is not like that.
They've sorry, they've recanted a bunch of dinosaur names that
came before the more recent ones, but because the more
recent ones have been better described and placed within kind
of the the family tree of dinosaurs. They go, we're
gonna stick with this one. So the Brontosaurus is long gone,

(38:27):
even though he came way before the Alisaurus or whatever.
Soaurus they're called now, right, And.

Speaker 3 (38:36):
Then you can also say denisivan has the genetic identifiers
from even the fingerbones or the jaw, right and versus versus.
This is morphologically in a skull, which gives us wealth
of information, not as much as the DNA which has
been under the denis. So that part doesn't matter and

(38:56):
we'll get sorted out, right.

Speaker 2 (38:58):
I really want to take a look at this skull though,
and think about the shape. And we don't have the
lower jaw but upper like the cheekbones, the brow. It's
really defined. The cheekbones narrow to the upper jaw tooth.

(39:19):
And so if the lower jaw is matching that, like
I'm imagining like a heart shaped face, like not not
a big round, square jaw like this is more it's
more delicate, except for the brow. Like I don't know,
it's the way the way it looks, I'm I'm really
picturing something very different.

Speaker 3 (39:38):
Figure Private chat, Private chat. I'm going to send you
a link because I don't know how to share and
by the time I figured it out, we'll be halfway
through the show. So there was there was a reconstruction
that was done of the homolongey of a homologuey based
on the skull, based on the dragon man skull.

Speaker 5 (40:01):
That's tough to look at, it's like just because it
looks very cartoony.

Speaker 3 (40:09):
Yeah it's not. It's not the most but I mean
what you're looking at is bone definition. I think the
profile is.

Speaker 2 (40:17):
The one that brow is very browie.

Speaker 3 (40:20):
There's a dense, thick raised brow bone like so your
eye those eyebrows that sit on that thing are they're
they're up there right, they're out like you can't miss
It's it's way up top.

Speaker 5 (40:38):
And then that's interesting that eyebrows would be right on
the crest. I guess that makes sense.

Speaker 2 (40:44):
Yeah, and that we don't know that that's just how
the artists pictured it. We don't know that.

Speaker 5 (40:51):
Who knows, or their hairline might have met up with
their eyebrows and they didn't have a forehead.

Speaker 3 (41:00):
It's also very possible.

Speaker 5 (41:02):
I want to see that.

Speaker 2 (41:08):
There's so many aspects to this that are super fascinating.
I'm I just remember the many conversations that we have
had on the show with you about Dragon Man and
the discovery and how it got classified as homologuey And
now this advancement is like another step in that story,
and it's it's really interesting to see these understandings weave

(41:32):
the tail together of our past. It's fascinating.

Speaker 3 (41:37):
Yeah, and we will know, We will know all in time.
It's just especially when you have to find, you know,
one hundred and forty thousand year old data points, they
can be a little tricky to get a hold of.

Speaker 5 (41:52):
If you see a strange skull in the wild, don't
pick it up, call your local archaeologist, throw it in
the well. No, no, don't do that.

Speaker 2 (42:05):
What's that lassie skulls in the well?

Speaker 1 (42:12):
Blair?

Speaker 5 (42:13):
Yes, you guys have to poke.

Speaker 2 (42:15):
What do you want to do?

Speaker 5 (42:16):
I do have something to poke. Let's talk about it.
So I brought this to kind of the short stories
because it's it's kind of about animals, but it's more
about tools that we use to survey animals. So sharks, sharks,
and rays, condric thians are pretty much all endangered. They

(42:40):
are difficult to study. Shark reproductive biology in particular is
really hard to study. Some of them give live births,
some of them have egg sacs. Some of them can
be pregnant for over a year. Some of them have
a whole yolk sac situation. Some of them can hold
on to sperm and get pregnant later. The shark reproduction

(43:01):
is crazy, and so it can be really hard to study.
And if you want to see, for example, if a
shark is pregnant or what their hormone levels are. A
lot of the time you have to collect a shark.
You have to catch a shark, and even if you're
going to release it afterwards, you have to do an endoscopy,

(43:22):
or you have to do some sort of blood draw
You have to do something that's kind of invasive. So
it's not just it's not so simple. You have to
pull it out of the ocean or bring it back
to a lab. You do these kind of studies, You
look at hormones, what's going on in the reproductive tract,
all these sorts of things, an ultrasound perhaps, and then

(43:48):
either you release them back or you don't. Maybe you
keep them in your lab. So there's a potential for
an impact on an individual. There's also a potential for
an impact on an entire population if you're taking out
a breeding female. For example, if you think about I
used to talk about this at the aquarium all the time.
If you hunt a shark or kill a shark and

(44:11):
that shark is pregnant, it takes them so long to
have babies. Their pregnancies are so long that there's a
huge impact. Maybe they spent nine months growing that baby
and they were three quarters of the way there, and
then not only did they get removed, but that baby
that they were going to have got removed from the population. Right, So,

(44:32):
interrupting sharks intentionally, unintentionally in their path to reproduction, even
to study shark reproduction, can be problematic, right, And so
researchers from University of Barcelona figured out that they could
use actually a little skin biopsy to test hormones in

(44:59):
a shark. And so they were able to extract and
analyze hormones directly from the skin from skin samples, and
they used an enzyme I know, assay technique that's already
commercially available, so they didn't have to invent anything new there.
They also got to use what was basically a fancy
pole that is already being used to collect skin samples

(45:26):
for other reasons. So it's a pole attached to a
remote sampling tip that penetrates the shark's thick skin, and
so that's already being used to obtain data for genetics, diet,
or the impact of pollution in sharks. But they found
that they could use the same little skin biopsy and
test hormones and learn all sorts of things about the

(45:49):
reproductive history of that individual, the current reproductive status, where
they are in their hormones cycle, if those things could
be impacted by pollution or other sorts of human impacts.
There's a lot of potential to use this to learn
more about the reproductive biology of sharks, the timing of

(46:12):
shark biology of reproduction. There's a lot that still isn't known,
partially because of that slow timeline, and they're a lot
harder to study because maybe over a two year period
you only get to observe one shark pregnancy. That's not
a lot of data, right, So that kind of the
opposite of the fruit flies. So this is a really

(46:35):
exciting idea to create a promising technique to collect reliable
biological reproductive data in free ranging sharks. Again, you don't
have to bring them to the lab. You can do
it to wild sharks just as they swim by. Just
go give them a little pinch and you get your
little skin biopsy that gives you all of the information

(46:57):
you need. So this is pretty exciting. I also like
the idea of this being expanded beyond sharks. There's a
lot of animals that we study in terms of aquatics,
but also terrestrial animals that you could probably take a
little skin biopsy from and learn a lot of information.
So I actually think this is a potential for a
much larger application of something like this.

Speaker 2 (47:23):
I'm trying to imagine though, like birds or you know,
other animals, Like the misnetting of birds can be really traumatic,
and you do the blood draw, you do different things
tag them, but sometimes the question is, you know how
much of that experience stresses out an already stressed bird

(47:44):
and causes them to go on and have a less
healthy or successful day.

Speaker 5 (47:53):
Right, So if you could use feathers left behind in
the nest and test it for these same things, because
that's a keratin, for lack of a better work, like
excretion right from the skin, So there could be hormones
that are carried through there at trace amounts, so it's

(48:13):
worth looking at.

Speaker 2 (48:16):
Yeah, I think there are. There are so many methods
then the less not in not invasive in terms of
poke boop, but invasive in terms of capture and handling
and time being a prisoner of human hands. Like, uh, yeah,
that's going to be better for the animals.

Speaker 5 (48:37):
A yeah, I helped with a missnet netting once it
was it felt very violent. Yeah, for those of you
that aren't aware. So basically, when when birds are foraging
first thing in the morning, particularly in an area that's
very has a lot of mist in the morning, you

(48:58):
can put out these mis nets. They're totally invisible in
the thick fog. I did it at Point Rays in
the Bay area, so very very foggy in the morning.
They can put out it almost looks like a volleyball
net that you like, stretch between a couple of trees,
and then birds fly into it, get caught and then
just hang there. And so researchers they don't let them
hang there for long. Researchers have time, they put it

(49:20):
out and then they collect it's it's pretty quick. They're
not there for a very long time, but then they
can pull them out. They can measure them, they can
tag them, they can do whatever they need to do,
collect with their samples they need, and then they can
be released.

Speaker 2 (49:34):
Yeah, and the ideal is when the birds fly in
and they kind of get stuck in like a little pocket.
So it's just like a pouch that they fall into
and oh you take them out and it's great. But
like sometimes because they struggle and the way they fly
through and how big they are, like they get there,
things get it's like necklaces that get tangled, and you

(49:59):
have you try to get them as you know, peacefully
disentangled as possible that you know. Yeah, sometimes you have
to cut the net and that's like yeah, and then
usually you're like, oh this bird's so stressed out you
just let them go.

Speaker 5 (50:14):
Yeah oh yeah absolutely, yeah.

Speaker 2 (50:18):
Missnetting whole thing it is. It's not like you leave
the net and leave it there. People are there watching
so the birds. Yeah, and the net is like this
thin then thin spiderwebee thread.

Speaker 5 (50:33):
Yeah. But so you know, similarly that's with aquatic animals.
You might try to net them or something like that,
but now you could just poke them with a stick,
get this little bit bit of skin, get all the
information you need okay with a stick, Oh my gosh,
with a stick for science.

Speaker 2 (50:52):
For science, a really quick stories for science. Researchers are
sending cannabis into spade. Researchers have figured some stuff out
about bananas, so I don't know, maybe bananas won't go extinct. Additionally,
we've talked about anthrobots before, which are these little like

(51:13):
self organizing not human organs or things like robots, kind
of like the frog embryo cells that were turned into
like biobots. The anthrobots are from human cells, and similarly,
they self organize and they do their own thing, and

(51:36):
like the researchers like, oh, you're gonna be like a
little robot for me. And so normally, when you take
a cell and you use our biological techniques to create
pluripotent stem cells or to reverse or encode particular instructions

(52:00):
into cells, it ends up being like, you know, it's
regenerative medicine. But it follows the normal plan of the
early embryo, where there's a ball of cells that's the blasticist.
The blast of cells, the blasticist ends up getting the
central to the tube into the tube that goes through

(52:22):
the middle that becomes the central notochord, and from there
it grows and you have symmetry between left and right,
and things are supposed to develop symmetrically. So these anthrobots,
they decided to see how self organization plays out. They
took these little tracheal cells from people uh and they

(52:46):
grew them into the spherical oblong. These cells are spherical
oblong covered with cilia, and they're capable of swimming and
repairing wounds in neurons. When they took away the instructions
to be a tracheal cell, they decided to work together

(53:11):
and they changed the expression of a whole bunch of genes,
about half the genome, nine thousand genes. And this was
not with instructions from the researchers or anything, nothing synthetic whatsoever.
And these cells work together to make a ball of cells.
They expressed embryonic genes. The donor was twenty three years old,

(53:36):
the cell twenty one or twenty three years old. The
cells his calculated cellular age was twenty five. The cells
themselves were eighteen. So this anthrobot got younger in terms
of its cellular age. It got rid of some of

(53:56):
those aging tags that are part of the aging process.
So there was a I don't know they got it
deaging that occurred anyway, So the cellular robots biobots, they're
three D structures. They're supposed to be airways cells, but

(54:19):
then they were like, nah, I don't want to do
that anymore. And so the primary goal of the organoids
is supposed to recapitulate native tissue architecture and physiology. But
then they were like, nah, we're going to make a ball.
And so these cells grew into a ball of cells

(54:43):
that when you cut the ball in half, it just
made new balls of cells. They had no symmetry or
symmetrical understanding whatsoever. So although they came from adult cells
that should have had symmetric understanding or instructions, because of
the the reuse of embryonic tags or the reactivation of

(55:05):
embryonic aspects, they went back to almost like this blastocyst phase.
So but partially because not in not completely anyway, they're
trying to understand what these cells, what they do, and
when you take away everything, what does it mean. And

(55:26):
they say that the anthropots exhibit a highly altered, more
ancient transcript transcriptome, so they think it is a an
understanding of it helping us understand evolution in our development,
in our development, and how sales work. Anyway, anthrobots, they're

(55:51):
cool and when you put pretty lights on them, they
can have the I want one of these in my
house to like put pretty colors on the wall. It
looks like it used like in a light show or something.

Speaker 5 (56:05):
But the I don't know that that looks that looks hypercolored,
but gross to me.

Speaker 2 (56:09):
It is hyper colored. Yeah, but this is a depth
depth colored with the corona of cilia that provides locomotion.
So these cells organized, they've taken all sorts of shapes
that are not there, like supposed to be shapes. They've

(56:30):
decided to reverse the cellular aging clock. And they're like,
we're gonna we're gonna roll around and be awesome and
do our own thing. There we go, anthrobots, this is
cool science.

Speaker 5 (56:44):
Maybe we was a black light poster.

Speaker 2 (56:47):
Maybe we'll all learn how to be younger from anthrobots.

Speaker 3 (56:51):
It just invented its own life form.

Speaker 2 (56:54):
Is that it's not life. It isn't it's not part
of an organism anymore. So it started do Yeah, it
started doing its own thing. I mean, it still has
human kind of instructions, but it was like, I don't
want those anymore, and it kind of like it got
rid of some and reactivated others and it made its own.

(57:15):
The cells are like, this is what survival is, man,
We're going to do it.

Speaker 3 (57:19):
No, I mean it sounds like cancer because really, actually
that's kind of what it sounds like. It's like, yeah,
we've cut off ties with the rest of the tissues
and now we're going to try something completely different and
try to.

Speaker 5 (57:36):
Say that's so funny. I was gonna say, it looks
kind of like a tumor, yeah.

Speaker 2 (57:42):
Because it's the cells, aren't They're not really none of
them are really similar, right that. It's not as if
they're like, oh, organized cellular types the way that tissues work. Yeah,
I don't know. Up, we might figure out more about cells, life, evolution,

(58:04):
all that fun stuff by looking at this kind of stuff.
Oh Blair, Okay, this is my really really do you
have another one here? Just? Do you have another one here?

Speaker 3 (58:13):
Yeah? Yeah, I gotta hope more. Sorry, So this is
I'm going to follow up on that. With Boston Children's Hospital,
scientists have created a five day method of generating functional
vascular organides. Capable of supporting blood flow and in viva
and graftment. So this is basically they've sped up engineering

(58:41):
of tissues as well as things you might use for
graphs or regenitive medicine by creating a functional vascular network.
This has been one of the tough things. So you
can build an organ you can build the scaffolding, you
can get it, you can get you placement to occur,

(59:03):
but you can't keep beating it because every cell in
your body needs some access to the vascular system, the veins,
moving the blood, supplying the nutrients and you know, changing
out taking out the trash and giving you the good stuff.

Speaker 2 (59:16):
Is this the one publish? Is this acta bio materiality? Oh?

Speaker 3 (59:26):
What is it? This isn't sell stem cell where it's published.

Speaker 2 (59:31):
Okay, so this is not university University of Michigan.

Speaker 3 (59:35):
No, this is Boston Children's Hospital scientists. Now let me
I could go back and look at the full thing,
because you know, you've got to lead research situation and
then you're going to have like a bunch of others
that are that are connected to it. They're also participated,
but usually usually in a story they're going to talk
about like where the lead author's institution was, but they

(59:58):
may be you know, a list of like thirty researchers
at ten different places after that. But the point of
this was that they also did they did some really
they went beyond the sort of experiment that they were
doing in a weird way. So some of these there,

(01:00:27):
So Okay, within about within five days, about half the
cells are used in each organoid turned into blood vessels
and those cells built hollow to networks wrapped by smooth
muscle partners. So it's the method that you're using is
turning these organoids into blood vessels. Fine dropping the organoides
into a collagen gel let them swell to nearly one

(01:00:50):
millimeters and ramped up genes linked to arteries. So they
also showed that they could get biggering and after implement implantation,
organoids tapped into the host's circulation. They're storing roughly fifty
percent of lost blood flow and injured limbs in the experiment.

(01:01:11):
So now that's a huge step. So now you've you've
created something that can generate new new vascular tissue or
new vascular tubulars.

Speaker 2 (01:01:21):
And.

Speaker 3 (01:01:23):
They implant it and it's like, oh, hey, there's a
whole network. Here, let's tap in and and now they're
part of they're part of that the full body's vascular system.
They did a kidney grafted capsule where they had the
organoid delivered human vessels surrounded by transplanted mouse isolates. This

(01:01:45):
is the little pockets that have the generate the B cells.
So letting is few is one hundred isolates equivalent keeps
she was a hund isolate of these local capsules of
isolates kept blood sugar normal in diabetic mice for one

(01:02:08):
hundred days. Mice that received three hundred isolate's equivalents recovered
normal glucose about half of them. It was given one
hundred equivalents kept the blood sugar normal for the full
hundred days. Others conclude that this transcription factor programming offers
a scalable path to tailor made organoids capable of rappid engraftment,

(01:02:32):
tissue rescue, and potential heart repair after I mean, that's
one of the reasons that the post heart attack period
is so difficult, is that you have damaged tissues supplying
the heart with the nutrients that it needs. And its

(01:02:52):
heart's job is of course to pump it to the
rest of that system. So then it's a whole downstream
issue literally and also improving cell therapy survival and potentially
a durable diabetes therapy. Wow.

Speaker 2 (01:03:06):
Huge, huge, huge, And.

Speaker 3 (01:03:08):
That's only one. There's another diabetes type of diabetes here
coming later too, where they've also like we're so close
people reverse aging and ad vasculature, because there that system
could be like build it all in there. I mean,
this is this is like one of the problems with

(01:03:30):
any kind of tissue repair or limb replacement or any
of these sorts of things is we don't have a
way to feed the new limb.

Speaker 4 (01:03:38):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:03:39):
So on the other side of this, we years back
interviewed a researcher named named Andrew Putnam, and he's a
tissue engineer researcher. He's been working he was involved in
like putting an ear on the back of the mouse
kind of stuff, and his latest study follows right. The

(01:04:01):
reason I asked about where this study was from is
that his latest study with his team at ACTA Biomateriality
is the development of the a method to actually with
the three D printing and the development of synthetic organs

(01:04:22):
artificial organs that are printed with cells. They have created
a method to print the vascular structure in a way
that is supportive of a whole tissue.

Speaker 3 (01:04:35):
And so and so here's the thing. You combine printing, right,
so now you've got like, okay, we can print out
this basic vasculate. You don't have to hit every cell. Now,
now it looks like you can add these little organoids
to your hot spots or your dead spots or your
you know, put them in there and they'll do the
rest of the connecting for you. They'll go in there

(01:04:57):
and say like, oh, you got a great system. Here,
We'll put a little bit here. You run a line
over there. It's like the electrician that comes in after
the engineer and and sets the the everything up so
the lights stay on.

Speaker 2 (01:05:10):
Yeah, I think the combination of the two because there
is the how can you use how can you like
prompt the body to do what it knows how to
do and rebuild and repair. But in cases where you
have to create a thing that then allows you know,
in these in the case of really needing a synthetic organ,
like the idea that you could actually develop a living

(01:05:32):
organ that's synthetic. And this is this is where yeah,
the two all these things together. You said that, and
I was like, what, I didn't know about that one.
I knew about this one. This is so cool. Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:05:42):
And it took like and again they're they're building it
to a working Uh you know, it was like a
five day process of growing them up. I guess it
was pretty rapid.

Speaker 2 (01:05:53):
That's very that's really neat, that's amazing. I don't know
what the time level. I don't know what they're doing
with the printing stuff. But to have it all work,
someday everybody, we will not have an organ shortage. We
will actually be able to help people and we won't

(01:06:13):
have to worry about like drone delivery of dry ice
packed kidneys across so cities.

Speaker 3 (01:06:20):
Yeah. So you create your lab kidney and you have
all the vasculature built into it that is needed. Now
when you go to attach it to the body, use
these organoids that are setting up vasculature at the intersection
where they connect, and now you have a self connecting

(01:06:42):
system versus somebody going in there and trying to connect
veins or given an artificial temporary supply, you have now
a way to connect everything.

Speaker 2 (01:06:51):
And if it's done in the right way, you have
the connector, and then it also tells the body cells
to just go in and make sure this all keeps working,
and then you know it's it'll be. It'll be like
the coral reefs that exist on top of tires, except
as your kids, your liver.

Speaker 3 (01:07:12):
Can I make a request in the universe, if we
do get immortality, a longevity that lasts a span of multiple.

Speaker 2 (01:07:20):
Centuries, can we at least figure out how.

Speaker 3 (01:07:26):
Can we spend that time in the real world?

Speaker 2 (01:07:31):
Just the.

Speaker 3 (01:07:33):
Use those phones just so little time. You need all
the information as fast as you can get it. I
get it. But if we have centuries to get around
to the conversations, let's just do it in person.

Speaker 2 (01:07:45):
Just taking this moment to remind everybody about the study
out of mi I T that suggested that using artificial
intelligent tools is actually making people dumber. Yes, And speaking
of that, Blair, I do need to share this story

(01:08:06):
this week about a company out of Japan, H two
L has what they call a capsule interface. So once
upon a time there were people making nap pods and
caps and there were other people like, oh, I dig
the nap pod and we can make it into like
body sensing so that you could like track your workers
we know when they're working, to like make know when

(01:08:27):
they're stressed out or not working and be able to
track everything related to that. And this has gone one
step further. It's like a massage chair. But the company
has created what they call Twist. It's Stanford and Simon
Fraser University Twist. And this is a system that allows

(01:08:50):
humanoid robots to mimic people actions and what happens in
this situation in with the capsules. Capsule h volume here
on my end and start over so I could actually
present this stuff. Yeah, lie down, relax, control your humanoid robot.

(01:09:20):
Capsule interface pays attention to movements, pays attention to small
motor twitches. Uh, body sharing so that you can I
mean we talk about like you know, mirroring when we
work together.

Speaker 5 (01:09:39):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (01:09:40):
This is a capsule interface that uses your physical very
small movements to control a humanoid robot in the real world.
So when it comes down to it, you will never
have to get out of a chair again.

Speaker 5 (01:10:03):
Wow, that looks like you'd really have to learn how
to use it. That seems like it would take a
like a long time to learn how to how to
do the right small motor functions to make anything. But
I think I guess the the good piece of this
is if you are someone who has physical limitations, yes,

(01:10:28):
then you could potentially make smaller, less strong movements and
command a robot to do like large scale action. So
that's cool.

Speaker 2 (01:10:42):
So I really appreciate the fact that you are bringing
up that positive ACPENTT because I think that's like that,
you know, if your.

Speaker 5 (01:10:47):
Bed back, that's the actual thing, right, Yeah, that is the.

Speaker 2 (01:10:51):
Real positive use of it, right. I mean another use
also is for astronauts controlling robots from a craft in
orbit to robots on a planet, or you know, maybe
there are various ways that we can incorporate these you know,

(01:11:11):
haptic technologies to really benefit the way that we're able
to get things done.

Speaker 4 (01:11:18):
You know.

Speaker 2 (01:11:20):
I mean I have a As I get older, I'm like,
oh I can back. You know, I don't know if
I ever want to lie in a bed and let
a robot do it for me, I just want to ask,
ask Marshall.

Speaker 5 (01:11:32):
Yeah, I think that would be bad for your year back. Actually,
I also think that your muscles would atrophy, you.

Speaker 2 (01:11:40):
Said, or lose it.

Speaker 5 (01:11:41):
Yeah. Yeah, yeah, that's why I mean That's what I
would want to say, is like, why why would you
want this? That's why you would want this medical reasons, right,
Otherwise it's it seems like a gimmick.

Speaker 2 (01:11:59):
I think I think that there are some really good
uses for this technology and this kind of technology, like
you said, but I think they're all there is also
the gimmicky aspect, And what I am concerned about is
the profit driven nature of these technologies and the way
that they will be promoted and kind of like a

(01:12:22):
solution before a problem for mass audience, like you know
who who really wants to pay for this? Oh? Governments, corporations, military,
ding ding ding ding. Yeah, so those are the unfortunate sides.

(01:12:45):
But and uh, this is you know where we are where. Unfortunately,
it will not necessarily be part of the convalescent home
uh models or tools that are available. It will not
be available like so many other technologies are not available
available to the masses unless they're being used in an

(01:13:06):
extractive way.

Speaker 5 (01:13:08):
Anyway, I don't like I can I ask one more
follow up question? Okay, okay, so they made a whole robot.
I'm sorry you were winding up, but they made a
whole robot and you had to sit in a whole chair.
But couldn't you use this methodology to create limbs for

(01:13:33):
somebody who's missing a limb, so that small motor movement
of the remaining piece of the limb would move the
rest of the limb. Like, isn't that? I feel like
that's if you.

Speaker 2 (01:13:47):
That's part of where the prosthetic technology has been going.
They've been looking at those left the the existing muscle
motor signals and seeing how and that's part of it. Yeah, absolutely,
But why not use this sensitivity of the haptic aspect there?

Speaker 6 (01:14:11):
Yeah?

Speaker 2 (01:14:12):
I don't know. I just want my VR gamer bed
when I go to when I go to sleep sleep,
who knows what will happen?

Speaker 5 (01:14:20):
I tweitech in my sleep and my robot went on
a rampage.

Speaker 3 (01:14:25):
Mm hmm.

Speaker 2 (01:14:26):
It's it's like the next oops, I took ambient and
who knows who knew?

Speaker 3 (01:14:33):
So so other aspects. So this is this is ability
to do remote controlling of a body basically.

Speaker 2 (01:14:41):
Totally a robot body. Okay, No, I don't know why,
oh or even like what if it could remote control
the exoskeleton of a person, so I can.

Speaker 3 (01:14:59):
Immediately that is do Shane muscular dystrophy. Yeah, like if
this could or or or even possibly a tie into
like Parkinson's or something where motor control is lost in
a human there are there are And it was sort

(01:15:21):
of interesting when you were talking about like this will
only be used by you know, corporate people.

Speaker 2 (01:15:28):
We didn't say only.

Speaker 5 (01:15:32):
Radical implication first.

Speaker 2 (01:15:35):
Was very right off the bat, it was great.

Speaker 3 (01:15:42):
I would I would like I would like to take
that that filter that we have for everything only being
deployed by a tech bro community. Right, it's very American.
You go anywhere else on this earth basically, and they're going.

Speaker 2 (01:16:08):
To apply to ethical philosophies.

Speaker 3 (01:16:11):
They're going to apply these technologies in the most ethical way.
Not everywhere, I guess, not always, not always, but at
least at least you know, we have we have those
places that have things like universal health care where they
are trying to apply any new technology to help people

(01:16:31):
first and have a small percentage of their GDP doing
military and a lot of regulations regarding their corporate aspects
of the society, so it is possible. Hey, you know,
higher taxes are usually mean you're spending money on people.

(01:16:55):
That's that's what that's translates into in a lot of places.

Speaker 2 (01:16:59):
That's why I'm just started doing income text. Anyway, moving
on from all this, what science. It has so many societal.

Speaker 5 (01:17:11):
Influences, the impacts.

Speaker 2 (01:17:13):
We should talk.

Speaker 5 (01:17:14):
About it more.

Speaker 2 (01:17:15):
And maybe if we were like really really talking about it,
you'd listen to this Week in Science, and more of
your friends would listen to This Week in Science, and
actually you are listening, So invite your friends, get them
to subscribe. Make sure you're subscribed. Head over to Twist
dot org or we have show notes. You can click
on the Patreon link if you are interested in supporting

(01:17:38):
this show with the community of people who are sup
supporting us on Patreon. There's also a link to PayPal
if you prefer that. I don't know about it, and
our Zazzle link is there as well, where you can
get cool, cool merchandise that is representing Twists and the
Animal Corner, and there's art created by Blair and so

(01:17:59):
many things that she's put together there and it does
also help support the show. We appreciate your support. We
really can't do it without you unless I want to
put more ads and try and find corporate sponsors who
might tell us what we're supposed to say, and I
don't want to do that.

Speaker 3 (01:18:17):
So no, everybody about vaccines this whole time and that
they're all.

Speaker 2 (01:18:22):
Bad justin we're not going to talk about that as okay.

Speaker 3 (01:18:31):
From mind tesla that's self driving in the proposing lane.
But it's fine, it's fine, we're coming back.

Speaker 2 (01:18:37):
We're coming back on the day that they have reconvened
a SIP and it was missing a couple of people.
But who knows what's gonna happen and with like vaccines,
and I knows, I just you know, everybody, people need

(01:18:58):
to be respected, but people who have uh not done
the same work and like they're we we need to
talk about what experience is required for actually making these
decisions about public health and how to support it so
they are supported. Yeah, okay, Uh anyway, I think it's

(01:19:24):
time for the part of the show that brings us joy.
I mean it used to bring us uh error, it
used to be traumatic insemination and like crazy, I don't know,
slime trails, weird, I don't know Blair, it's time or

(01:19:45):
Blair's Animal Corner.

Speaker 3 (01:19:47):
With Blair Creature five pigs pid. I hear that animals
except for giant cap where.

Speaker 5 (01:20:13):
Uh orcas so, uh, yeah, We've talked on the show
about orcas sinking ships, We've talked about them making bubble rings,
We've talked about them using dead salmon as hats, and
now this week they say, for the first time ever,

(01:20:38):
dolphins have been recorded using tools.

Speaker 3 (01:20:43):
Wait, that can't be the first time. Haven't we heard
that story before?

Speaker 5 (01:20:49):
Yes, we have. Also, there's a whole conversation about whether
the bubble rings themselves were tools, whether the salmon hat
was a tool, if it was luring other animals in,
or what it was there for, Whether.

Speaker 3 (01:21:01):
Dolphins already us like sponges to protect their noses, yes.

Speaker 5 (01:21:06):
Which or is there a type of dolphin. So let's
let's push that kind of sensationalist headline aside and just
talk about orca skincare because that's really why I wanted
to talk about this today.

Speaker 3 (01:21:20):
Sponsor.

Speaker 5 (01:21:21):
What is what is their uh their skincare routine? Oh yeah,
So if I'm an orca, my skincare routine is to
use my teeth to grab the stalk of kelp by
its stipe that's the long narrow part near the seaweeds,

(01:21:42):
hold fast where it tethers to the rock. Then I
use my teeth and my body and drag off the
kelp to break off a piece of the narrow stipe. Next,
I'll go up to my partner, could be just a friend,
could be a family member, just somebody I'm comfortable with that,
and I flip the length of the kelp onto their rostrum,

(01:22:03):
which is basically the nose right and press my head
and the kelp against my partner's flank, just the side
of their body. Then we use our fins and our
flukes to trap the kelp and we roll it between
our bodies. And then I roll and I twist in
an S shaped posture, and I do that to have

(01:22:28):
glorious skin. Researchers suggest this is part of skin maintenance.
They believe that it is actually some sort of either
skincare or exflation technique on their skin. So it just
don't anyway. They figured this out via drone. There's this

(01:22:53):
group of orcas that are doing it. It seems to
be a social activity and they are just convinced it
is skincare.

Speaker 2 (01:23:07):
Is where are where are these guys? But where is
this group?

Speaker 5 (01:23:11):
They're in the Pacific Northwest on the border of Canada
in the US.

Speaker 2 (01:23:15):
Ooh, so Are they like the fish eaters or the
sea leaders?

Speaker 5 (01:23:19):
Mmm? Good question, all right now, M yeah, so that's
the question, right, do you want to like smell like kelp?
Are you? What I would say though, is are you
just playing around? Are you just having fun? What is
the difference between play and tool use? Because what if

(01:23:42):
they're just playing like they play with dead fish? Why
wouldn't they just play with kelp?

Speaker 7 (01:23:50):
I don't know.

Speaker 5 (01:23:51):
I don't know. It's just it's very strange. It's it's
a very weird intentional behavior. We're watching it on the
screen right now. Looks very funny. It's it's definitely it's
done with intention.

Speaker 2 (01:24:06):
It just looks like those two two orcas swimming together.
Like does it end up in uh mating or does
it end up in some kind of like is this
male female only? Males only? Feel like? Is is this
the kind of thing where it is some aspect of

(01:24:27):
I don't know, hierarchy maintenance or I mean, is it
like when you're taking you're taking a bath and like
your partner comes in with like, oh, gives a nice
lufa to your back, Like yeah, I don't yeah.

Speaker 5 (01:24:44):
I mean, who knows, I I don't picture kelp as
being particularly rough.

Speaker 2 (01:24:51):
So oh alo kelping with daughter. So this is a
mother and daughter. That's interesting.

Speaker 5 (01:24:59):
I looked it up. They are f sheeting orcas primarily salmon.

Speaker 3 (01:25:06):
I now, I'm now I'm obsessed with your comment just
because it's the only data point I have to link
to anything of wanting to smell a kelp? I mean,
could it be a camouflage for for hunting?

Speaker 5 (01:25:24):
How smelly is kelp? I guess it's pretty smelly, think
about seaweed, I don't know, strange.

Speaker 3 (01:25:34):
To get closer to their prey, the whole thing.

Speaker 2 (01:25:38):
So the daughter right, the daughter orca in this just nicely,
smoothly like swam past the mother with a little bit
of This is such a gentle mm hmmm part, Like
there's a gentle behavior where you know, you think of
all the different things that they do. This is is

(01:26:00):
not like aggressive, It's not you know, it's not like football.

Speaker 5 (01:26:06):
But I guess that's kind of my point, Like what
if it just feels nice? What if there's no reason
behind it and it just feels good? And in which
case is it still tool use if it just feels good?
Maybe maybe it is.

Speaker 2 (01:26:25):
I think the hard part here also is that the
different pods of orcas that we know of, like the
fish eaters versus the sea leaders. The fish eaters are
more they stay in one place. They're the local way,
the local orcas, and so you're gonna have more of

(01:26:47):
a related population of individuals. And so maybe this is
kind of like bonobo stuff where it's part of keep
part of keeping the peace and the relationships between especially
like a daughter that's going to grow up to become
a matriarch, a son or a brother that instead of
fighting there you know, it's not dominance, it's it's social bonding.

(01:27:13):
So I mean, I'm making all sorts of stuff up here,
but I just think.

Speaker 3 (01:27:17):
It's so fascinating because I don't I never have thought
of orcas as in fighting or having a whole lot
of internal competition that way that they're just sort of
like here's the hierarchy. I go with it. I can
totally be wrong about that also because I'm also speculating,
but I've never heard of like like you see like

(01:27:37):
sharks that have other shark bites on them all the time.
You never hear about orcas with orca bites.

Speaker 5 (01:27:44):
Oh I do think that, Yeah, I'm not.

Speaker 3 (01:27:48):
I don't. I don't, I'm not aware of it.

Speaker 5 (01:27:50):
Yeah. Yeah, I think dolphins and dolphin relatives are pretty savage.

Speaker 2 (01:27:58):
But I think that's also the thing where the residence.
That's like the thing that the many researchers have talked
about is the resident orcas are not as aggressive or
violent as the interlopers, the ones that come in, you know,
based on where the fisher moved, like where the seals
are going, like they come in and out and they

(01:28:18):
move around, and so the transients are the ones that
have a lot more aggressive behaviors, fights for hierarchy, and
the residents. Yeah, that's I mean, this is that's what
I remember hearing.

Speaker 5 (01:28:34):
Mm hmmm. Yeah. And so I mean the researchers at
the end do say like they're not sure if other
orca groups do this, They've only seen it in this
group so far that I'll bring up the dead salmon
hat again, that was that was mostly one specific group
of orcas that we're doing that. So this could be
just a social activity that these particular guys do. More

(01:28:59):
researchers needed.

Speaker 2 (01:29:02):
Yeah, keep looking at the organ You're.

Speaker 3 (01:29:04):
So difficult to observe.

Speaker 5 (01:29:06):
At the same time, yeah, mm hmmm, yes, my last
fishy story of the evening, I had an actual fish
or shark, a marine mammal or dolphin, the orca, and
now I have a cephalopod. I want to talk about
octopus suckers. So octopus suckers are pretty sensitive to tell

(01:29:31):
people when I worked at the aquarium how they can
smell through their suckers. This is a study from University
of California, San Diego, and they are saying that they've
found that their taste suckers on their sucker cups, specifically
that allow them to detect harmful chemicals. So let's get

(01:29:51):
into it. In prior research, they showed that octopus can
tell when there's food underneath a rock or somewhere that
they can't see just by feeling around near it. And
so if that's true, then they can definitely sense smell,

(01:30:12):
whatever you want to call it, taste through their suckers
enough to be able to recognize something that they can't
physically see. And so in this new research they wanted
to see what was going on specifically with octopus eggs. Now,
mother octopus will test their eggs. They'll toss out ones

(01:30:33):
that are no longer viable they'll know which ones are
still viable and which ones are not just by touching them.
How can they possibly know that? And so they wanted
to look at specifically the sucker cups. They observed octopuses
in action in the lab, they tested and tossed bad eggs.
Scientists followed this up by looking at the outer parts

(01:30:55):
of the tops with an electron microscope and found just
so many microbes. The bad eggs were just swarming with bacteria.
So the idea was, Ooh, are they detecting the microbes
or the materials the microbes produced, or are they detecting
the bacteria or the bacteria poop basically, and so they

(01:31:16):
scraped everything off in set about identifying what they found.
They found about three hundred different microbes that were most
common on spoiled eggs, and they were not generally found
on eggs that were still viable. Okay, that's a very
good lead. Also, they obtained samples of chemicals that were

(01:31:37):
produced by the same group of spoiled egg microbes. Then
they placed them in a petri dish, and then they
placed them with sensor cells or engineered octopus sensor cells,
and the cells reacted to them in a way that
they did not when exposed to chemicals by other microbes

(01:31:58):
carried from healthy octopus egg So they and then this
is the part that I think is really interesting is
they found similar microbes on the bodies of crabs that
octopuses refuse to eat because they had gone bad. So
when you feed an octopus in a laboratory, they already know.
They'll tell you, no, bro, this is too old. It
smells rank.

Speaker 1 (01:32:19):
And so.

Speaker 5 (01:32:21):
Similar microbes on those dead old crabs as on the
eggs that did not make it. So this the implication
is that octopuses have sensors in their suckers and allow
them to detect chemicals produced by microbes that have broken
down decaying biomaterial and so just via touch they can

(01:32:41):
tell which eggs have gone bad and which food has
has started to rot.

Speaker 3 (01:32:48):
That's amazing.

Speaker 2 (01:32:51):
It reminds me of so many like babies who who
use their hands and feet to explore or actually, no,
it's never mind. It's the mouth first for everything, isn't it.

Speaker 5 (01:33:06):
It is? Yeah, yeah, that's interesting, But there's I mean,
there's other animals that do it, like flies. Flies taste
with their feet right.

Speaker 2 (01:33:20):
And don't like amphibians, like not just with their oxygen transfer,
there's like also all sensory stuff.

Speaker 5 (01:33:28):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, we're learning more and more about amphibian skin.
It seems like they can taste through their skin. Mm hmm.

Speaker 2 (01:33:38):
I'm really I love the fact that there's this now
this new connection between not just sensory in terms of
touch the suckers, which like, don't play with an octopus
you'll end up with you know, sucker damage on your skin,
but the fact that they're highly sensitive to particular bacteria. Like, yeah,

(01:34:02):
if we were if we were to take smart like
we look at food, you smell food, but like if
you were to just touch something to be able to
oh that's yeah, got bacteria on it, we can't do that.
That's amazing. And I don't lick things.

Speaker 5 (01:34:17):
First, No, this morning, I was I was eating strawberries.
I was feeding strawberries to my son. I don't know
if I should admit this on the air, but I
had several strawberries and then I pulled one out towards
the bottom and there was a patch of old on there.

Speaker 2 (01:34:35):
No.

Speaker 3 (01:34:37):
So so here's the here's the way you can use
to remind yourself that it's Okay, is that that's in
absolutely every bushel of strawberries that humans have eaten. Yes,
and so if it if it was harmful, we'd all
be dead.

Speaker 5 (01:34:56):
That's fair, That's very fair. But I did I did,
in that moment wish that I was an octopus so
I could have touched the first one.

Speaker 3 (01:35:03):
And this batch is spoiled, spoiled, it's actually not yet,
it's actually somewhat somewhat rare. I think in California, like
it happens that you you get down a layer. It
was in every everything in Denmark, every bit of fresh

(01:35:25):
produce that was packed had if there was a bunch
of stuff, could be a bunch of onions, a bunch
of berries, a bunch of anything.

Speaker 2 (01:35:33):
Some of the we are the grocery stores, the grocery
stores in the United States are not a representation of
how grocery stores are in the rest of the world,
and in California we're commpletely.

Speaker 3 (01:35:45):
Different world compared to anywhere else.

Speaker 2 (01:35:50):
But let's not continue talking about waste. I mean, we're
all suckers for a good cure.

Speaker 3 (01:36:00):
Oh, that's the lead in sucker for a good care.

Speaker 2 (01:36:04):
Okay, Ye did I that I did that?

Speaker 3 (01:36:06):
Fine, it is fine. Well, let's see what do we
got here? A cure for type one diabetes. Beta cell
replacement achieves insulin independence in humans. What yeah, this is
a human wow, Oh my gosh. So let's see the

(01:36:32):
participants aged range. They all had type one diabetes. They
also all had what's called impaired hypoglycemia awareness, which means
they can't sense when they're dropping when their blood sugars. Look,
they don't feel it. Some people can sort of feel it,
and then you can take steps and react to it.

(01:36:52):
So this is a very dangerous category of the disease
because they can't feel the sense when when the blood
sugar changes have happened, and so they don't maybe get
the insulin in time or take some kind of like
control and time. Anyway, this is a twelve dose. Sorry, Uh,

(01:37:15):
this is a one time dose, isn't it. I think
it's a one time dose in twelve people. It's a
it's a stem cell treatment, uh, an ellugenic stem cell
derived isolate therapy. Again, that's those those little B cell

(01:37:36):
beta cell we're generating pockets. They're typically in the liver.
They took this basically, this stem cell treatment, and of
those that survived important caveat they basically became independent, like
went from type one, which is the worst kind of

(01:37:58):
diabetes possible to basically not having it, not needing to
do lecemic control anymore, not having the effects of it. Now,
a couple of people did die during this, but it
wasn't connected specifically to the treatment that they were on.
One was already pretty advanced in a near degenerative disease

(01:38:23):
and another one was also using a second treatment that
was outside of this study somehow, and so it can't
be connected in the study because it left the parameters, right,
it left the control.

Speaker 2 (01:38:36):
Yeah, but there is kind of there's still like the
end point. So when you're very limited, it's an outlier.
But yeah, it is amazing.

Speaker 3 (01:38:44):
It was fourteen people. The twelve who took the full
dose all remained free of severe hypoglycemia, and ten became
completely insulin independent, meaning they no longer needed to use
insulin at all. And the additional two they say the

(01:39:05):
insulin dosages that they required fell sharply. So this is
very limited group.

Speaker 4 (01:39:12):
Right.

Speaker 3 (01:39:13):
The trial was open label, small cohort. It didn't have
pre specified outcomes, so they weren't rating it against anything.
Uh So it requires validation. There's already a longer term,
more comprehensive trial underway. And this is one of those
stories like I feel like I've heard before, Like there's

(01:39:38):
been versions of this attempted, there's been initial lab research
or maybe on mice, and this this could be, this
could be a continuation of stuff that we've covered that
was on mice or that was in a lab without
an animal experiment. We don't I don't you know, I
don't sometimes connected all the way back.

Speaker 2 (01:39:57):
No, I honestly, I don't feel like we have gotten
to this point in terms of human treatments, right, And
but that's what I.

Speaker 3 (01:40:06):
Mean is that this could be, this could be the
human trial based on stuff we've talked about previously in mice. Yes,
because these all these things continue to evolve. But this
is this is a really fascinating area. You know. We
have the the one that replaced vasculature that was doing
repair and the liver of isolets. We have this the

(01:40:29):
stem cell treatment that was reversing like really amazingly. With
all of this talk about the evils of big pharma
or whatever, we might just not need an entire category
of drugs soon because of research that's being done, so
I have time. People are surviving long enough to get

(01:40:51):
there through Big Farmer, So thank you, Big farmer.

Speaker 5 (01:40:56):
Yeah, part of this, Jackson says, thank you Big Pharma,
Thank you Big Farmer.

Speaker 2 (01:41:01):
What part of the study though, it hinges on taking
immunosuppressant drugs. So the question is do the you know,
the cons the side effects of immunosuppressants outweigh the benefit
of not having diabetes anymore? Like, how does that balance out?

(01:41:24):
So there is there is something to be considered there
at this point in time, right, and that is that
is a.

Speaker 3 (01:41:32):
What do you call it a temporary Where do you
go when you got a temporary fix in place to?

Speaker 2 (01:41:40):
You know, a band aid?

Speaker 3 (01:41:42):
It's a band aid. The the lack of universality is
a band aid. The immunisuppressant aspect is a band aid
because we don't have universal donor stem cell and to
even on this small corehord to fourteen people, creating the
stem cells directly from those individuals' own cells and then

(01:42:04):
re implanting them would have been beyond the scope of
even being able to conduct the trial.

Speaker 2 (01:42:09):
So this is beginning.

Speaker 3 (01:42:10):
This is that primitive step. Now, cart therapy is a
prime example where you have to take out the T
cells of a person, re engineer them in the lab,
build them up to a larger volume of cells in lab,
and reintroduce them into the patient. And these re engineered

(01:42:32):
T cells are then designed to target the cancerous cells
and say a blood cancer, and they've had remarkable success.
There are people who have been cured of leukemias and
other diseases within forty eight hours and with longevity like
non reoccurring within forty eight hours. These reprogrammed T cells

(01:42:58):
have run through the body and eliminated the disease. Here's
the downside. You have to re engineer a specific person's
T cell to reintroduce it, and so you have highly
specialized labs that are required with a lot of lab
research time and working these things over, you know, to

(01:43:21):
build it up and lab in all this. So the expense,
I don't know, call it a million dollars for the treatment.
Your insurance doesn't cover My insurance doesn't cover it. You
got it. There's people who can afford to pay out
a pocket for it, and that's great, but in the meantime,
it's a treatment that's only going to be accessible to
a small percentage of the population because of the expense,

(01:43:42):
because of all of those those individual specific, non universal
aspects to it. Okay, there is now where is this
from uh to to? Actually it doesn't say where. A

(01:44:03):
Capstan Therapeutics scientists are demonstrating that lipid nanoparticles can engineer
car T cells with within the body. This is without
laboratory cell manufacturing, and.

Speaker 2 (01:44:18):
So you don't have to take them out, you.

Speaker 3 (01:44:20):
Don't have to take this is something they put in.

Speaker 2 (01:44:23):
This.

Speaker 3 (01:44:24):
This is a method that they say is using targeted
lipid nanoparticles to deliver messenger RNA specifically to the c
D eight T cells, those killer T cells that are
going to go do the work. So this is you
can almost think about this as a an equivalent to

(01:44:45):
the m r N A vaccine. Okay, where you're you
you're just adding the instructions that the that the T
cells need in this case specifically the T cells that
you would be engineering to go do this work. You're
now training them in the body based on this. Okay,

(01:45:07):
So it's more than a says here, more than twenty
million US patients living with autoimmune conditions without access to
these treatments again because of this incredible expense, the cap stand.
That's the company's lipid nanoparticle drug is formulated once administered

(01:45:31):
to many patients without tailoring the genetic payload for each patient,
making it a universal option. Now, I don't know what
the cost of creating these lipid nanoparticles are. I don't
know what the cost of that drug would be. I
don't know. A lot, da da, da da. It's not
going to be a million dollar treatment, right, it's not

(01:45:52):
going to be inaccessible if we can push this through
all the way. So this is not in humans. This
is a dual animal study. They had humanized mice and
they said the first dose, let's see, they got near

(01:46:13):
total tumor clearance in four of five animals. And these
are leukemia bearing mice. Four out of five animals were
had near total tumor clearance within two days of the
first dose. Then they gave another second dose and three
days after the second dose they were all clear, complete

(01:46:38):
clearance of leukemia.

Speaker 2 (01:46:42):
Find a humanized in a humanized mouse in a mouse mouse. Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:46:48):
They also did a follow up with some sanomous monkeys. Yeah,
and uh yeah, and they they found here they were
sort of looking at the depletion cross blood spleen lymph

(01:47:08):
nodes of these B cells that they were targeting. The
expression was observed and up to eighty five percent of
CD eight T cells, so that showed that it was
hitting the target. Minimal expression was shown in CD four,
so it's finding the correct T cells to train on

(01:47:31):
us and yeah, and B cells. The population began at
day twenty one and was characterized by the native phenotype,
so it looked like it worked pretty good there.

Speaker 2 (01:47:49):
So it's working. It worked in genetically modified mice, it
worked in monkeys, which are genetically related and like all
of zoologically very related to humans. This is this is
really cool, like the idea that you don't have to
take do the bone marrow removal, that you don't have

(01:48:12):
to take it, you don't have to do the harvesting
from the blood from the body that's invasive to get
the sea tael the T cells out to do the
car T right, like the the the modification right to
say you're healthy, don't be go go target the cancer. Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:48:32):
So they don't know if it's as durable because the
CART therapy is the expensive clinical based versions that they've done,
they have longer term studies that have shown that there
is no return, so they don't have that yet. They
can't they can't say this is a more a more
durable treatment.

Speaker 2 (01:48:53):
But yeah, because when you're taking when you're harvesting them
from the body, like you are taking out the stem
cells source, and you're basically reprogramming the source of the
rest of the population of those T cells.

Speaker 3 (01:49:05):
Yeah, they can also go on to train others, right,
Like it's.

Speaker 2 (01:49:08):
Yes, yeah, exactly, and so and that's kind of the
same idea here.

Speaker 3 (01:49:12):
You know, I don't know who they could play with
dosages or but this needs to move on to human
trials and all the rest of it. So it's still
early pipeline. But it would be a universal car TE therapy,
which is the car T therapies as they are have
been trying desperately to find a way to make this

(01:49:32):
universal so that we can get it to more people.
Is a treatment. But this approach looks like they may
have cracked the code, so to speak. And basically you
could get a I'm gonna just call it like a
cancer vaccine that can cure a cancer you've already got right, Like,
essentially you know, now that we have mRNA vaccines, you

(01:49:54):
can say in mRNA treatment is sort of vaccine, Like, right,
I suppose that's fair.

Speaker 2 (01:49:59):
This it's mobile, it's it's a way to mobilize the
immune system troops to go in and be more effective
and not get fooled anymore, like to like, yeah, trojan horse,
that trojan horse. It's bad. You should you should be
dealing with that. Yeah, this is it. I love. Also,

(01:50:23):
like you mentioned, historically, cartie is the thing. It's kind
of a last ditch. It's it's expensive, it's financially hard.
It's always been specific to an individual. It's not the
universal thing. And if all these technologies are able to
be either universalized or created in a way where we

(01:50:46):
can personalize them cheaply, then it like that's where that's
where we need to go so that it can help
so many people.

Speaker 3 (01:50:56):
That's cool, And then you can be like, oh, hey
where were you last week? Oh I had cancer? Oh
you get it taken care of? Yeah, yeah, it's gone,
that's all done. Like that's how quickly these treat This
treatment works is within that and that's like you know,
you think of, uh, the entire history of loss to

(01:51:17):
cancer that we have dealt with as a species.

Speaker 2 (01:51:23):
It's not it's not just it's not just cancer. They're
using it on multiple sclerosis. They're using it on a
bunch of diseases that are immune system and genetically based.

Speaker 3 (01:51:33):
It's a bunch of it, like heart like. They recently
did a did a run on a hard tumor target
that also was functioning. So yeah, this is this is
where the cancer cure that everyone's talked about, the moonshot cancer.
This is kind of the arena it's going to take
place in. Is engineering your body to go go fix it.

Speaker 2 (01:51:57):
No more poison.

Speaker 3 (01:51:59):
And I gotta a couple quick ones. I want to
point out there was a mice. Mice, I know, a
couple of really quick ones. Mice born of two dads
is probably gonna get all that horrible treatment we were
talking about before. Basically, what they have discovered is a
way to get rid of this imprinting genetics, which is

(01:52:19):
genes that specifically want to be one sex or the other.
They want this this gene here, that spot that you've
got even though you're you know, half your mom and
half your dad. Kind of these genes here have to
come from mom. They have to or these ones have
to come from dad. Whatever, But yeah, mice, two dads,
it's perfect. So they figured out a way, basically the

(01:52:44):
injurreear around the seven of these imprinting genes that are
supposed to come from mom. They created a viable offspring
from two separate male mouse sperm. They had to have
a female host it and this this offspring, the two

(01:53:04):
offspring that they successfully got through went on to have
their own offspring that are perfectly healthy. So very so.
Now this is extremely low point eight point three depending
on where you start the math point zero eighty, very

(01:53:24):
slow through put. They lost a lot of blasticisms and
development stages and the rest of it, and so this
is also yeah, so this is But what it's doing
is it's hinting that we don't have the full picture
of these genetic imprinting sites, that there's more that we
can do. Now you might hear about this like scientists
are trying to make it so that two dads can

(01:53:45):
have offspring, and yeah, eventually that is going to be
the goal. But in the meantime, it also is going
to teach us a lot about mammalian reproduction because this
is a very mammal specific thing that it matters that
you have is male in this female offering different genes
in different places, where in some other species it's not

(01:54:06):
quite as important. It didn't have as much of that
imprinting effect, and it's going to maybe help with infertility issues.
It may.

Speaker 5 (01:54:18):
So I was going to stay endangered species. So first
of all, if you lose all of the females, right
of course, but you have males left, then you could
still potentially continue things. But genetic bottleneck. So if you
only have a very small number of individuals, there's only
so many pairings of male and female that you can do.
But if you suddenly compare any two individuals, you have

(01:54:41):
way more permutations of genetics. You have way more opportunities
to broaden the gene pool in the next generation, so
that that would be a huge benefit.

Speaker 3 (01:54:54):
That's right, and it's not even I had not even
considered that, but yeah, that is a major, major, major
aspect of this research that it could that it could benefit.
That's brilliant insight. Yeah. Oh, and then I had one
more thing I was gonna spit out. I forgot all
about it. This is the one. This is the one

(01:55:16):
that we were talking about before sex specific pathways. So
men get more cancer than women.

Speaker 2 (01:55:25):
Just generally speaking, we have because they are splitting cells
more often because of their reproductive pathway and like all
that kind of stuff.

Speaker 3 (01:55:34):
Yeah, well I didn't know why, but apparently we have men.
We men have higher cancer incidences overall, but postmenopausal women
faced heightened vulnerability to certain cancers, specifically melanoma. So skin
cancer is much more of a lady issue than it

(01:55:55):
is a gentleman's issue. Anyway, Basically, I'm not gonna get
into the whole story. They narrowed it down to an
interaction that has to do with estrogen at some point,
so it's hormone driven sort of feedback loop that is

(01:56:16):
creating the higher rates, creating these runaway They did some
knockouts with mice of certain genes and they can find
that Okay, if we knock it out, it reduces it,
we can put it back. What's interesting, the really interesting
part of this is that these sex specific molecular pathways

(01:56:37):
that they're discovering also link up to traditionally drugs traditionally
employed in hormonal cancers being beneficial to treat skin cancer,
which is something that they didn't know, and potentially actually
a host of other cancers. There's these always these odd

(01:56:59):
things that women who have gotten chemotherapy have, you know,
a less chance of getting xyz, Alzheimer's, nergender diseases actually
show up less in the aftermath you have that chemo brain.
But then that normal age on sen for survivors of

(01:57:21):
Alzheimer's rates is lower. And then here we have, you know,
other drugs that are used for hormonal issues, actually when
you apply them to something that's not been considered hormonally
linked at all, also are working and having potential suppressive aspects.
So the fact the play is you got to study
the ladies because they're built different, and if you don't,
your treatments that you've designed for men aren't going to

(01:57:43):
be as effective. Well, I'm the.

Speaker 2 (01:57:45):
Ladies always comes back to the guys. But the interesting
aspect of this is that we're looking at the skin,
which is through its processes, impacts cholesterol, vitamin D and
cholesterol is like the base molecule colicystic kitan others. They're

(01:58:06):
the base molecules for steroid hormones, estrogen, testosterone, et cetera.
So the skin is actually one of our biggest sex
hormone or hormonal influencers, along with our bones and our
bone marrow and like it all works together. So this
is interesting to me because as you get older, the

(01:58:27):
other things inside aren't working as much, and maybe that
is a feedback loop between the outside and protection against
things that maybe when you were younger, other stuff was
able to protect a gout against, but I can't anymore. Anyway,
it's sea spiders.

Speaker 3 (01:58:42):
Third time for sea spiders on the harvesting microbes on
the seafloor in the bents. No, well, maybe next week
I want to.

Speaker 2 (01:58:49):
Talk about brilliant brains. I mean, come on, there are
there's big legged, weird spiders on the bottom of the ocean.
Go look it up. Don't you think I saw that
story too? Come on? Okay, so I wasn't here last week.
One of the stories I wanted to bring last week

(01:59:10):
was a story that I had some serious issues with,
and then another story came out then I still have
serious issues with. And they're not the same study, but
they both have to do with like photons from the
brain and yeah, so okay, when we look at the brain,

(01:59:30):
we're usually looking at electrical signals from the outside eeg.
We use MRI magnetic resonance to look at the way
that polarized molecules like move and shift and so that's
presence of oxygen and blood flow and all this other stuff.
And so with fMRI, if you have blood move into
some areas that are more active, that means there's more

(01:59:52):
water and so you have like more activity, and so
that's how you get like woo active stuff. But now
they've like brought it down to like really cool lower
levels of like at the level of like axons, dendrites,
different stuff, which is very cool. But the researchers, researchers
recently have got this whole thing. Do you remember stories

(02:00:15):
where we talked about photobio luminescence in human organisms? No, no, no, bioluminescence.

Speaker 5 (02:00:24):
You're talking about how like people's are pink.

Speaker 2 (02:00:29):
Kind of and how we like, like forever it's always
oh my gosh, that one clows in the dark.

Speaker 5 (02:00:33):
Everything does.

Speaker 2 (02:00:34):
But we talked about and researchers started looking at everything
and they discovered that there is, uh, there is atomic
activity that excites electrons within the human body that stimulate
the emission or result in the emission of photons. So

(02:00:54):
there is the ability to uh detect photo luminescence biolumin
like from people when you're in the dark, we glow. Right,
all are tissues, but a lot of it. It's like, oh,
my spleen, where does that light go? Probably just gets

(02:01:18):
excite something else, gets absorbed by something else. Does my
spleen light up? And like, can you see my spleen? No,
you're seeing light from the outside of the body, which
similar to an EG, which is a surface measurement of
uh like the grouped activity right of all the combined

(02:01:38):
activity in that kind of goes. Oh, it's more over here,
more over there, eg. You it's not high resolution, right,
it's all from the outside. First study physicists, engineering type people.
They decided that there's this idea among you physicists if

(02:02:03):
you shine a light on one side of a person's
head into their head, that because of tissue characteristics and everything,
there's no way you can measure that light coming out
on the other side of the head. We are not
Homer Simpson. According to physics, diss you dish, you bream.

(02:02:27):
And then they were like, hey, but maybe, and they came.

Speaker 3 (02:02:34):
At some point, Yeah, so I feel like I've enough
you pour enough photons in there, you can get a
skull to glow.

Speaker 2 (02:02:43):
And that's kind of what they did. They studied in
neuro They published a neurophoton neurophotonics Photon transport Transport through
the entire adult human head. So in the study, what

(02:03:04):
they did is they they set up a laser system
that was like a two inch wide tube that attached
like a little sucker to the side of somebody's head
near the temple that like shined a a particular frequency

(02:03:25):
laser at the head, which is used for like these
kinds of measure. It's a very specific wavelength about eight
hundred nanometers.

Speaker 3 (02:03:37):
Into your brain.

Speaker 2 (02:03:38):
Oh yeah, okay, so here the I'm just gonna tell
you the start. I'm gonna tell you some problems. So yeah,
we're gonna shoot a laser at your head. The laser,
they had to make it not narrow because it was
one point to watts of power that was going to
be shot at your head for like two minutes, and

(02:04:00):
so they had that's why they had to make it
a two inch wide laser. They had to distribute it
so it wasn't a filly focused beam of power that
burned people's heads. Okay, So first problem is that there
are issues with the alignment of the wavelength and the

(02:04:21):
polarity of all the how those waves all move together,
that if you have not colimated them in a particular way.
Basically what you've done is you take in a finally
focused laser and then you've gone go do whatever you
want to do. So they like added a whole bunch
of noise and whatever, and they shot it at somebody's
head at eight hundred nanimeters and one point twos and

(02:04:43):
then they had a detector, a photo detector on the
other side of the head which with photo multipliers to
really make sure, like you know, like ice cube down
in Antarctiga, trying to really make sure that they got
the signal. And they had to like they had to
wait like a half hour they measured. It was like

(02:05:05):
two minutes of laser in a half hour of measurement.
Huh out. Yeah, Anyway, I think they should what they I.

Speaker 3 (02:05:18):
Think they should have just proven their point by making
it a very narrow, highly focused and just shot it
through the brain and been like, yeah, I can do it. Right.
You can put light in one ear and have it
come out the other burned.

Speaker 2 (02:05:30):
Tabel's heads. Yeah, so we're not Homer Simpson. They did
show that there was a slight delay after the the
laser pulse in that time period that they did have
an increase in flotones.

Speaker 3 (02:05:47):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (02:05:48):
Yeah, after it happened. They measured something. Something happened. They
their conclusion were that the brain, like the neurons of
the brain, the the tracts of fluid within the brain

(02:06:14):
allow refraction of light through the brain along certain conduction
paths until they are able to come out the other side.
They did like very few actual in lab experiments to

(02:06:35):
get this result. Everything else in the paper was simulated
and they're like, oh, based on our simulations, you're gonna
like put a laser on one side and the detector
on the other and it'll totally measure.

Speaker 3 (02:06:45):
But can you like, is there control? And I'd just
like to see if they're just not getting some kind
of heat energy off of having this thing stuck to
your ear for half an hour. Is there any kind
of control?

Speaker 2 (02:07:00):
So so what they show are numerical simulations and basically
the pictures they show are we shot a laser onto
somebody's head and it didn't go through the brain. It
kind of went around it. And so there's this whole

(02:07:22):
the whole thing is and they even have stuff where
they like in the paper they change their their their
their significant their si units. So it's like some it's
like watts or centimeters in another it's like inches, like
they change things all and they every like it's a

(02:07:43):
very and this was the first one and they're like, look,
we disproved this old idea that you can't detect light
from going through. But they didn't just say, hey, we
did this thing and we measured. They went so far
as to say, we can take this and we're going
to be using this in the future to actually measure

(02:08:06):
like within the brain, like tumors and things in the brain.

Speaker 3 (02:08:12):
Honestly, Okay, then needed to go away.

Speaker 2 (02:08:17):
Okay, So this is this paper that I was like, wow, okay,
I was super I was like, whoa, this is cool.

Speaker 3 (02:08:25):
Can we can we do some shaming? Where is it?

Speaker 2 (02:08:28):
From University of Glasgow? And it's a lab which has
been very as far as I know, pretty well considered historically,
but it's like a like a particular that's the author

(02:08:50):
Royal Academy of an Engineering, University of Glasgow. But there's
a particular lab that they're associated with with with relations
to like lighten, photons, and all sorts of stuff. Anyway,
moving on from this paper which seems like it was
a vehicle to support funding they had and other results

(02:09:12):
they had had in previous papers and not actually doing anything,
there's another study which was brought out by a completely
different group saying that the bioluminance is the thing, right,
we emit light, which that in itself, Okay, interesting, how

(02:09:36):
do you measure it? What do you do? We can
measure it from the outside whatever. So this group decided
to create a way as his University of Canada, and
they were trying to measure the glow of light that
comes from the brain. But not like with you know

(02:09:57):
the patients that have the brains cut open that are
getting up les surgery. No, this is from outside the skull.
So again they're looking at this light supposed photon emission
from outside and trying to coordinate, like Colla, trying to

(02:10:17):
match it to electrical activity within the brain. And the
method they used to match it to the electrical activity
within the brain was EEG measurements from outside the brain. Anyway,
so they have created where they're talking about first proof

(02:10:39):
of concept demonstration of ultra weak photon emissions from the
human brain to serve as readouts to track functional states.
They measured and characterized photon counts over the heads of
participants while they rested or engaged in an auditory perception task,

(02:10:59):
and they did demonstrate that these upes ultra weeek photon
emissions could be distinguished from background photon measures and that
for a given task this count might reach a stable value.
They showed that the light that they were measuring these
photon emissions were not related to infrared radiation or heat

(02:11:23):
or changes in temperature. They were near visible to visible
wavelength bands and they say that they the frequencies suggest
that they are the byproducts of metabolism. What I'm I

(02:11:48):
am not doubting that maybe they were able to with
their setup be able to measure photons or at least
some kind of photonic noise in a dark room right there.
There's something going on there. But I'm really really interested

(02:12:09):
in how they were measuring what they were measuring, because
it seems like they're the measurements of these upes. They
weren't actually like on the heads themselves. They were kind
of like separated away from the head a bit like
there's things that details that I'm I want to know

(02:12:33):
more is basically what it is, and I'm upset at
at the I guess the reporting of this work as
if it is this huge incredible thing without any questioning
about it, that this claim of it being a proof

(02:12:57):
of concept demonstration of human brain derived up E signals
are occurring, occurring, and then and and that this might
help UH to differentiate between healthy and diseased brains or
different like there's so many it's.

Speaker 3 (02:13:17):
A huge huge step between we we've got a signal
maybe and now we can anything.

Speaker 2 (02:13:27):
Yeah, and and so the question also is, you know,
you know what what is like I need to look
into this second study, but the fact that they were
on there like one after another within the last week
of this you know, photons from the brain work, which fine, okay,

(02:13:52):
but from outside the skull, you're not gonna like, what's
happening with the dura matter, what's happening with all the circulation,
what's happening with UH the lymph system, what's happening with
the skull itself, what's happening with the skin around your head?
What's happening with your hair follicles.

Speaker 3 (02:14:08):
What's happening with the microbes on your skin.

Speaker 2 (02:14:12):
There's there's just this whole Uh, there's a lot going
on there that I think is being left out. And
to think that because oh, we looked at an EEG
which is from outside the brain, and we correlated our
photon measurements from outside the brain to the e.

Speaker 3 (02:14:33):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (02:14:34):
Anyway, this is the this is my last two weeks
of what.

Speaker 3 (02:14:40):
Is it like, Like somebody just needs to point out
it's okay to have an all result, like I've even
like something right conclusive. Then you can just be like
we did a thing and we just wasn't really conclusive
or convincing of anything. That's a study and you can
do that and it's completely totally worth doing.

Speaker 2 (02:15:07):
Yes. So anyway, I think it just looks bad on science.

Speaker 3 (02:15:13):
You know. It's like, oh, this rare gem of a fixture,
epper of a house can be yours for the low
price of just needing a contractor like that happens in
some industries where you poof when you build up the
value of a thing. In science, it's just it's a
kind of a backfire immediately.

Speaker 2 (02:15:31):
Yeah, And I think One of the assumptions that keeps
showing up, which was last week's and this week's, is
the assumption that these photon emissions they say in their abstract,
play a role and sell to sell communication and neural
cells might even have wave guiding properties that support optical channels.

(02:15:55):
Fun we've this is still completely speculative, all right. And
the study from last week it wasn't the neurons. It
was like the fluid filled cavities and the stuff around,
like the liquid around the brain anyway, So uh yeah,

(02:16:17):
my last story is super interesting if you like birds
in the morning and the way that the dawn chorus
gets going and why if you've ever questioned why the
dawn chorus, scientists still don't know. Researchers just published some
work out of it was out of Cornell Lab and

(02:16:41):
some works in the conservation by acoustics and Project Ivanni
in India. They looked at a bunch of recordings of
birds in the rainforest and they're like, oh, morning stuff,
what's going on? They published in Philosophical Transactions of the
Royal Society be trying to figure out whether it was
like they basically tested certain hypotheses, which is it the

(02:17:02):
morning air that allows the song to travel farther? Is
it temperature?

Speaker 5 (02:17:07):
Is it?

Speaker 2 (02:17:07):
Like they asked a particular questions, and in terms of
your null results, they published null results. They didn't figure
anything out, but they did take those hypotheses and suggest, nah,
it's not that, so it's something else. So as to
why birds do it, we don't know.

Speaker 3 (02:17:29):
Which is like, I mean, that's like the most important
thing is to get rid of all the things, to
try all the things that are possible out there and
knock out, get reduce it down so that you don't
have a bunch of assumptions or other ideas still lingering
at their because assumptions are very dangerous in science. Assumptions

(02:17:50):
can prevent work from moving forward. If everybody assumes that
this is a reason why and it doesn't get looked
at and it was wrong, then other things build off
of that assumption or work around it. And so yeah,
you got to knock down all of the assumptions at
least test them to see if they actually were correct.

Speaker 2 (02:18:10):
Which is kind of like those last couple of studies
which were kind of this applied physics stuff, but it
was in support of an idea and not looking to
see if they were like negating a hypothesis. It wasn't
in that interest. It was to do something. And so
I think that's the difference there.

Speaker 3 (02:18:30):
Yeah, that's why it sounds hinky when you have that
no result that you're poofing is that you have a
good you have maybe I mean, you maybe have good data,
but the fact that you are pushing it to be
something that it's not makes me even question the data collection.
That's the problem with that is that now it's not

(02:18:52):
even so much of is it really as big a
deal as they as they were poofing it, But now
it's more like was it actually right? Was it? Did
they actually follow that? Like now I questioned the whole
thing you're gonna be really that's why they, like every
every research paper is just filled to the brim with caveats. Ye,

(02:19:17):
where people are trying not to overstate anything. They're trying
not to make too big of a claim because they're
here's what just here's what we did find, and here's
what we didn't find, and here's how we did it.
And it may be possibly we don't know other stuff,

(02:19:38):
but all those caveats are there.

Speaker 2 (02:19:40):
So yeah, caveat comun caveat Caveat a couple of notes
from listeners. Aredy d from YouTube commented about last week's
show or two weeks ago and said, last week's the
art about spiders. I heard hard notes in your voice

(02:20:01):
in the after show, Blair. I just want to say
how much I appreciate what you guys do, and especially
now when science is getting hit really hard. And then
we had another email said, Hi, Twists, I just wanted
to take this moment to thank you for putting UC
Davis on my radar. I graduated this last week with
a master's in environmental policy and management, and I'm continuing

(02:20:24):
on to a PhD to study how to incentivize people
to become better environmental stewards. I moved out to California
a few years ago to pursue this degree. I love
the program, and my partner lives in Berlin, games so
it was time to move across the country. But definitely
would not have known about UC Davis if I hadn't
started listening to your podcast years ago when you were
still broadcasting from KATBS, which we still are. We actually met.

(02:20:48):
We actually met back in twenty sixteen during your live
show in Baltimore, which leads to me to ask, when's
your next live show? Thanks for keeping me up to
date on the science news. This knowledge has been super
useful when I was teaching high school science and as
I went through my master's program. Thanks keep updating the
world on science and ps Kiki my last name is

(02:21:10):
pronounced Roanovic for the Patreon rundown. Thank you, Thank you
so much. I love it, and there is there is
an image, and I was trying to figure out how
to share it, but it keeps moving around. Hold on,

(02:21:33):
I'm going to do a screen share of Paul Roanovic
from twenty sixteen when we did meet in person at
a live show. That's us. Congratulations on getting your degree,
Congratulations on finishing, and thank you for trying to do
work that is really important.

Speaker 3 (02:21:54):
Wait where was the live show?

Speaker 2 (02:21:57):
You said ball tomorrow.

Speaker 3 (02:22:02):
Teaching? He was already a teacher.

Speaker 2 (02:22:03):
Then he and Blair hung out and talked about teaching
for a really long time. It was I remember that.
But we've come to the end of the show everyone
and Blair has had to head out for late night
familial reasons, and I just want to say thank you
so much for listening to the show, and I really

(02:22:25):
hope that you enjoyed it. I got shout outs Faux
Show for everybody who helps this show happen and make
sure that you know we're able to keep doing what
we do on a regular basis. FATA, thank you so
much for your help with social media and show notes.
Gord Our and Laura, thank you for helping keep the
chat room a nice place to be all the different

(02:22:45):
places like Twitch and others. And Andy Ford, thank you
for recording the show. And Rachel thank you so much
for editing. And of course I need to thank our
Patreon sponsorss thank you too, Robert Orland, Robert W. Farley,
Lauren Gifford, Dana Lewis, ed and Mandel, Ali Viola, Aaron Anathama,
Arthur Craig Potts, Mary Kurtz, Teresa Smith, Rocher, Richard Badge,

(02:23:09):
Bob Coles, Kenton Northcoate, George cors we Are, Veila Zarb,
John Rattnaswami, Chris Wozniak, Bayguard Chef's Dad, Donathan Styles, A
kit A dun Stylo, Ali Coffin Schubrew, Don Monday's Pig,
Stephen Alberon, Darryl Meishak, Andrew Swanson, Fredis Wonder, four Sky, Luke,
Paul Ronovich, Kevin Rearden, Noodles, Jack Brian Carrington, David young Blood,
Shawn Clarence, Lamb, John McKee, grig Riley, Marquess and Flower,

(02:23:30):
Steve Lisonman, Aksima, Ken Hayes, Howard Tan, Christopher Rapping, Richard,
Brenda Minish, Johnny Gridley, Remy Day, Gee Burton Latimore, Flying Out,
Christopher Dryer, Ardiam, Greg Briggs, John Attwood, Rudy Garcia, Rodney Lewis,
Paul Phillips, Shan, Kurt Larson, Craig Landon, Sue Dostter, Jason
old Stave Neighbor, Eric Knaplan, makes e O, Adam Ken, Pertron,
Bob Calder, Marjorie Pauly, Disney, Patrick Piccararo, and Tony Steele.

(02:23:54):
Thank you, Thanks each and every one of you for
helping to support this show as we move through life
and into the future. Yeah, if anyone out there wants to,
you know, tell me how to pronounce their name and
have me mispronounce it for years.

Speaker 3 (02:24:15):
I guess it's uh, my name is actually pronounced with
a heavy French accent. It's the Jays are.

Speaker 2 (02:24:26):
Just Jackson.

Speaker 3 (02:24:29):
Jackson. That's the right. That's the right, that's the right
way to.

Speaker 2 (02:24:36):
Oh my gosh. Head over to twist dot org click
on the Patreon link. If you are interested and would
like to support Twists, we would love your support. It
would be great On next week show we'll.

Speaker 3 (02:24:48):
Be back broadcasting Wednesday, eight pm Pacific time from our
Twitch and YouTube and Facebook channels. And if you want,
you can listen to us as a podcast. Just google
this Week in Science somewhere in your Internet wherever, wherever
you want to find a podcast. We're probably already there.

(02:25:10):
You just need to put the name in there. If
you enjoyed the show, get your friends to subscribe too.

Speaker 2 (02:25:17):
Yeah, you're gonna keep going, keep going.

Speaker 3 (02:25:19):
For more information on anything you've heard here today, show
notes and links to the stories will be available on
our website, which is what's our website I forget twist
dot org twist dot org, where you can also sign
up for a mystery.

Speaker 2 (02:25:33):
Newsletter which is not hosted on substack.

Speaker 3 (02:25:38):
Miss. We love your feedback. If there's a topic you
would like us to cover or address, a suggestion for
an interview, please let us know. In one of the
social media counselors just send us an email. Just put
twist somewhere in the subject line. Your email will be
spam filtered into oblivion. There always adds we look forward

(02:26:04):
to discussing science with you again next week. And if
you learned anything from the show, remember.

Speaker 2 (02:26:13):
It's all in your head, just like that light, photons, whatever.

Speaker 6 (02:26:21):
This week in Science, This week in Science, This week
in science, This week in science. It's the end of
the world. So I'm setting up shop. Got my banner
refurl it says the scientist is in. I'm gonna sell
my advice, show them how to stop the robots with

(02:26:44):
a simple device, all reversible, the warming with a wave
of my hand.

Speaker 3 (02:26:49):
And it'll cost you is a couple of grass.

Speaker 6 (02:26:54):
Because this week science is coming your way. So everybody
is what I say. I use the scientific method for
all that it's worth, and I'll broadcast my.

Speaker 3 (02:27:06):
Opinion all over they.

Speaker 6 (02:27:10):
Cause it's this week in science, This week in science.
This week in science, Science, Science, Science, Science, Science, This.

Speaker 7 (02:27:18):
Week in science, This weekend Science, This week in science,
This week in science, This week in science, This week
in science, This week in Science

Speaker 6 (02:27:30):
This week in science,

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Crime Junkie

The Breakfast Club

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}The Future of Science Starts Now

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Crime Junkie

The Breakfast Club

All Episodes

The Future of Science Starts Now

Stuff You Should Know