Author Archives: Ceren Gulhan

Interplanetary Contamination vs. Space Exploration: What did Elon Musk Achieve?

Recently, the world’s first ever space-bound Tesla complete with his spacesuit passenger reached Mars. But, just what did we send to space?

Elon Musk’s Tesla in space with its spacesuit passenger. Image from Wikimedia Commons

On board with our dummy passenger, we may have just sent a bunch of organisms to Mars. However, to what extent should we care?

Scientists have different opinions.

Researchers worry that microorganisms from earth may proliferate on Mars. Based on evidence of bacterial resistance to extreme conditions, they aren’t wrong. Dr. Osman and his team concluded that some bacteria or bacterial spores can survive under stimulated atmospheric and radiation conditions of Mars. The team stated that the spores likely stayed dormant, however, with high UV and lack of water. In contrast, they found that non-spore forming bacteria can live for many years if they can find shielding from UV within uneven soil, or around spacecrafts. This means that we may introduce bacteria to Mars, thereby possibly eliminating any native micro lifeforms through natural selection.

A contrary argument, however, claims that we are impeding ourselves from exploring space with very strict regulations against interplanetary contamination. These scientists believe that if meteorites from Earth that crashed on Mars or space missions before planetary protection act couldn’t contaminate the planet, the modern bacteria won’t be able to either. So far, we haven’t seen any solid signs of ancient or modern life on Mars, which means we probably haven’t introduced any terrestrial life yet. In contrast, the argument states that if we somehow did, the planet is already contaminated. Then, should we really spend most of our space funding on sterilization, or prohibit some programs as a precaution?

NASA’s Mars Science Laboratory being prepared for launch in the clean room to keep the spacecraft germ free. Photo by NASA/JPL

Let’s go back to the Tesla orbiting Mars. The debate takes a whole new level with this SpaceX mission. Why? Because the car and its dummy passenger foreshadows what’s to come. By 2024, SpaceX is planning to send people on Mars. If the company achieves this goal, the proliferation of species will no longer be a question. Nobody sends people on a suicide mission with such publicity; the company will ensure human survival.  What else will definitely survive? Bacteria!

Elon Musk’s speech about future plans for Mars missions and beyond. Video by CNET on Youtube.

The same question applies. Should we care that we are introducing different species to Mars? Or instead, should we focus on how to survive in different planets? Surely, we can learn from planets a lot more if we can figure out a way to remain there.

If you ask me, it’s a tough choice. What’s the opportunity cost here? What if we are letting some bacteria die that may give us insight on many genetic processes? But what if there isn’t any, yet our fear is not letting us investigate any further?

Maybe let’s just let the space agencies decide for this one.

Let’s Talk About Weed

So last Saturday, I was enjoying my night out with friends. Then suddenly, some stranger started smoking weed.

How do people even bear that smell? It was so pungent that I got dizzy and had to leave.

With the recent legislation of weed and the visible puff of smoke around The Nest the other day, it seems we aren’t getting rid of the smell anytime soon. However, how safe is it to inhale smoke from marijuana?

Was my dizziness because of my frustration towards strongly unpleasant smells? Or is there a scientific basis to it? In other words, is being a secondhand smoker of marijuana harmful?

Vancouver Global Marijuana March 2015 – by Danny Kresnyak. Cannabis Culture on Flickr

In 2016, Dr. Wang and her team, supported by NIH National Institute on Drug Abuse, investigated the effects of secondhand Marijuana smoke on rats. The study concluded that exposure to smoke of weed is quite harmful for our cardiovascular health.

Let me explain. There is a system called FMD in our bodies that dilate our blood vessels when blood flow increases. Smoke decreases this activity. As a result, some substances within the blood accumulate in our vessels. Ultimately, this can lead to a heart attack or a stroke.

Are you worried yet?

The study reports that the effects of inhaling marijuana smoke on our cardiovascular health resemble that of tobacco. However, the effects from marijuana smoke last longer.

Average effect of  tobacco and cannabis smoke on FMD levels compared to air. Data at 0 minutes show levels before exposure. Figure by Ceren Gulhan, data from Dr. Wang et. al., Journal of the American Heart Association

Okay, so there are health implications. But, just what are we inhaling?
Another study conducted by Dr. Moir and his team in 2008 concluded that smoke from tobacco and marijuana have the same compounds. This means that many carcinogenic compounds in tobacco everyone is warning against are also present in marijuana smoke. In fact, compounds like ammonia and NOx that damage the lungs are more concentrated in marijuana smoke.

Despite how harmful secondhand smoke seems to be, there are currently no studies on how it affects our cardiovascular health.

So, what do we do? Should we ban cannabis again?

No. Frankly, even a year ago when I walked down the street at night I could clearly smell weed. Banning was never effective. We live in a time where people go by “you do you” as a lifestyle. If somebody wants to smoke, that’s their decision to make. Then some people also use cannabis for medical purposes.

We should take some actions, however.

Firstly, we must research the effects of secondhand smoke on people. Secondly, we need to know if smoking in open spaces remedies these effects. Judging by my nose, the diffusion of smoke into open air is not fast enough. Finally, we should support smoke-free environments for cannabis, just like we do for cigarettes.

Or, you can all try edibles instead. I am just saying…

Can We Manufacture “Magic” Rice to Treat HIV at Low Cost?

It appears that we can finally provide cheaper methods of HIV treatment to benefit patients in developing countries, where it is most needed. But is the world ready to accept this magic treatment?

In Rice Field – Photo by zcf428526 on Pixabay

In a study published on July 2018, Dr. Vamvaka and her team of scientists from various countries concluded that using rice grains to produce HIV-neutralizing agents is possible, at a cost much lower than current manufacturing methods allow.

Current methods use mammalian or microbial cells to produce proteins against the virus, however “these are expensive because the products must be extensively purified”, as the study points out. Additionally, the manufacturers must make several different proteins, to ensure treatment even if the virus mutates.

Plants seemingly offer a novel alternative. Cereal grains allow multiple proteins to be produced on the same grain and are safe to use as crude extract without extensive purification.

Sounds easy enough. But does it really work? The answer is yes.

After the study, researchers found that they could yield enough modified grains. The extracts from these grains also successfully neutralized the virus even at very low concentrations.

So, in theory, rice could be our new savior against a deadly virus. The researchers certainly think so. “This groundbreaking strategy is realistically the only way that microbicidal cocktails can be manufactured at a cost low enough for the developing world, where HIV prophylaxis is most in demand.”

But…

This is where things take a turn. Can we really propose that the world should suddenly rely on genetically modified organisms for treatments? As in the widely feared GMOs?

It won’t be easy.

March Against Monsanto Vancouver- by Rosalee Yagihara in Flickr. Monsanto, a company known for manufacturing GMO seeds, received a lot of backlash.

Let’s look at the results of a survey about the public opinion towards GMO’s.  CBC News states that in 2016, 62% of the respondents would prefer non-modified food. Why? Because they believe it is safer.

Forget about surveys. In Turkey, we have TV programs where people show up to claim any genetic process means playing God and is against religion. So, let me ask a simple question. If my country is like that, what is the possibility that other countries share similar opinions? I say it is very possible.

What is one glimmer of hope? The treatment from rice would be produced as medicine rather than a food item. People seem to be more accepting of modifications when the product is a drug.

In essence, yes, scientifically this is the most feasible method that is out there so far. Can we have people accept this treatment? It surely will be a struggle.

Nevertheless, it is a significant step towards combating HIV in the developing world, and I hope that we soon see the treatment in clinical trials.

Can We Manufacture “Magic” Rice to Treat HIV at Low Cost?

It appears that we can finally provide cheaper methods of HIV treatment to benefit the patients on developing countries, where it is most needed.

In Rice Field: Photo by zcf428526 on Pixabay

In a study published on July 2018, Dr. Vamvaka and her team of scientists from various countries concluded that using rice grains to produce HIV-neutralizing agents is possible, at a cost much lower than current manufacturing methods allow.

The existing methods rely on mammalian or microbial cell systems to produce proteins against HIV, however “these are expensive because the products must be extensively purified”, as the study points out. Additionally, the manufacturers must make several different proteins, to ensure treatment even if the virus mutates.

Plants offer a novel alternative. Cereal grains allow multiple proteins to be produced on the same grain and are safe to use as crude extract without thorough purification methods.

To create the anti-HIV rice grains, the researchers used genetic information for three different commonly prescribed anti-HIV agents, GRFT, 2G12 and CV-N, to implant into the rice tissue. The resulting rice were then tested by ELISA assay, using HIV-1 pseudoviruses to analyze inhibitor binding activity. While they were able to produce feasible amount of successfully transformed grains, the extract of rice grown with transformed seeds showed sufficient anti-HIV activity.

When tested for any interactions in between, the three reagents extracted from rice didn’t show any adversity. Instead, they complemented each other such that small concentrations of GRFT neutralized more HIV-binding sites.

Neutralization of GRFT in different combinations of anti-HIV proteins in rice. Figure by Vamvaka et. al. in PNAS

The research team believes that anti-HIV rice is the main method that should be employed to combat HIV in the developing world: “This groundbreaking strategy is realistically the only way that microbicidal cocktails can be manufactured at a cost low enough for the developing world, where HIV prophylaxis is most in demand.”

With such a promising development, it appears that we will soon be able to grow HIV-fighting rice to help HIV patients all over the world.