Category Archives: Organic Chemistry

Let’s talk to our cells!

We are one step closer to achieve communication with those 37.2 trillion tiny components that make up our bodies. If you have ever wondered how the human body is capable of doing impressive amounts of chemical work without us even thinking about it, now you can understand it! Our bodies are efficient in converting energy, and communication among our cells is key to the understanding of all the basic processes that govern our life.

Cells often communicate via receptors made of sugars, that are exposed outside of their membranes. Such processes are often carried out by tiny sugar molecules that interact with those in their specific target. Recently, a team of researchers from The University of British Columbia published a synthetic method for modified sugars with incredible potential. In other words, it is now possible to obtain reliable materials to applications in cellular communication, metabolism and other biochemical processes.

 

Figure 1: Structural representations of the transformation of sugars carried out by the researchers. Adapted from ACS Catalysis

 

This method was developed by using clones of genetically modified bacteria to express enzymes that are capable of modifying the sugar in accordance to the interest of the researcher. To achieve this, the scientists screened a library of 175 genes of the species E.coli that encoded variations of enzymes that can be used to catalyze selective chemical reactions in sugars for creating glycosidic bonds.

Computational representation of a hydrolase, an enzyme that breaks sugars. Adapted from Wikipedia

Enzymes are proteins that provide a path of a biochemical reaction to occur more efficiently. They are relatively easy to obtain and work with; however, they are specific to their target substrates which limit the extent in which their capabilities can be exploited. The scientists solved this issue by modifying the internal composition of the enzymes to improve the diversity of products in a process called selective mutagenesis. With the aid of this technique, the investigators obtained all variants that were tested in this experiment.

Schematic representation of bacterial transformation and cloning. Adapted from Griffiths et a (2000)

As the use of biotechnology increases, the understanding of our microscopic world becomes a major tool for scientific development. In this case, E.coli cells are essential since bacteria are inoculated with synthetic versions of genes that encode these enzymes and are then used as living machineries for protein production.

It is worth to mention that transformations of sugars were already reported. Nonetheless, previous methods rely on the use of expensive reagents as catalysts, which represent  a major cost and are not widely accessible. This new approach opens a significant area in biochemical research. As technology improves to newer and more accessible  methods, the diversification of these enzymes could develop new approaches for interaction with cell receptors that could enable us to understand what our cells have to say.

-Aron Engelhard

Journal Source:

Armstrong, Z.; Liu, F.; Chen, H.-M.; Hallam, S. J.; Withers, S. G. Systematic Screening of Synthetic Gene-Encoded Enzymes for Synthesis of Modified Glycosides. ACS Catalysis 20199 (4), 3219–3227.

 

Making Different Sugars with Enzyme (Pac-Man) In Our Body

Although eating too much sugar can lead to health complications, a normal intake of sugar has its benefits. This is because sugars take part not only in many cellular activities as an energy source but also in cell-cell communication as a communicator. In 2019, a research team led by Dr. Stephen Withers at the University of British Columbia made different sugars by using enzymes (Pac-Man-like molecules) in bacteria. This finding enables the building of many sugars that are commonly hard to find in nature.

What are sugars?

All sugars are made of hexagonal building blocks as shown in red in Figure 1. Two common building blocks are glucose and fructose. To make different sugars with only two common building blocks, we can vary the number and arrangement of the building blocks. For example, cellulose has three long threads that are arranged almost parallel to each other. In contrast, starch has one long thread that adopts a helical structure.

Now we know that different sugars can be made by varying the kinds of building blocks, the numbers of building blocks and the arrangements of building blocks. What we haven’t talked about is how the building blocks are linked. There are two issues with linking the building blocks. First, building blocks are much smaller than our cells. Getting two building blocks together is as hard as fishing a needle from the Pacific Ocean. Besides, getting two building blocks together takes time because they prefer to be alone. How can our mother nature solve these problems to keep us alive?

Figure 1. Sugars are built differently. Some sugars are longer and more complex than others. Source: riasparklebiochemistry

Here comes the rescue…Pac-Man in the cells!

The illustrations of enzymes are like Pac-Man. However, different from Pac-Man that eats any “food” in different shapes, enzymes recognize different substrates and those substrates only! Because of this substrate-enzyme specificity, linking two building blocks together is much easier. As shown in Figure 2, the enzyme will attract two specific building blocks, making them closer to each other and eventually join.

Figure 2. Different enzymes recognize different substrates. Source: Wikipedia

Besides, enzymes can speed up the “hugging” process between the substrates (building blocks), making the formation of a long sugar favorable.

Figure 3. Enzymes speed up reactions. Source: pinimg.com

Manipulation of enzymes to build different sugars for cell-cell communication

Knowing that enzymes have many advantages, Dr. Wither and his team looked for enzymes that speed up the linkage of sugar building blocks in E. Coli, bacteria that live inside our digestive tracts. They chose eight enzymes out of the 175 sugar-specific enzymes in E. Coli. These eight enzymes were the most specific to the sugar building blocks they were interested in. However, after further investigation, the researchers found that the enzymes helped speed up the breakage of the linkage(s) between sugar building blocks instead of the formation of the linkage(s).

Figure 4. Some enzymes speed up the breakage of linkages while others speed up the formation of linkages.
Source: Canstock.com

To solve this problem, the researchers reverse-engineered these enzymes from speeding up breakage to speeding up linkage by changing parts of the enzymes. Now different sugars can be made! As mentioned above, cell-cell communication relies on sugars. This is because two cells adhere via the interaction between extracellular sugars and specific cell-surface receptors. Once these cells adhered to each other, they can talk to each other about their internal cellular condition/environment and trigger a corresponding response. This has great implications in triggering an immune response to a viral attack. By engineering more sugars on the surface of the cells, cells in our immune system can more quickly talk to each other and fight off infection.

 

Journal Source:

Armstrong, Z.; Liu, F.; Chen, H.-M.; Hallam, S. J.; Withers, S. G. Systematic Screening of Synthetic Gene-Encoded Enzymes for Synthesis of Modified Glycosides. ACS Catalysis 20199 (4), 3219–3227.

-Pricia Ouyang

Bacteria: Friend or Foe?

Did you know that not all bacteria is bad? In some cases, they cause diarrhea, stomach ulcers, and even intestinal diseases. However, what if I told you scientists have found a way to manufacture antibiotics that are used to treat these bacterial infections from bacteria themselves?

Scanning Electron Microscope view of bacteria. Retrieved from: NYTIMES

Dr. Jason Hedges and Dr. Katherine Ryan of the University of British Columbia took a look into finding new enzymatic pathways for synthesizing nitroimidazole, which is a component in the antibiotic, azomycin.

So what is the point of this whole process and why do we even want to use bacteria to synthesize antibiotics?

By finding more ways to develop antibiotics from bacteria, this improves our knowledge on biosynthetic pathways. This is beneficial not only for the scientific community, but for the public as well. As bacteria develop resistances to antibiotics over time, the discovery of new antibiotics would be able to treat more patients suffering from bacterial infections.

How is this done?

Now how could something that sounds so complex be done? Let us take a look at their process step-by-step.

Like all scientists do, background research was performed to see how previous scientists went about finding ways to develop antibiotics from bacteria. To do so, a bioinformatics search was performed. Bioinformatics is essentially ‘googling’ information about a certain topic, but in this case, they would be using a scientific database such as the National Centre for Biotechnology Information (NCBI).

A cryptic gene cluster was found in the bacterial strain Streptomyces cattleya. This along with various enzymes were the main points of interest. Their goal was to use L-arginine; a fundamental building block of proteins, and find a way to convert this into nitroimizadole (a component of the antibiotic, azomycin

Theoretically, a blueprint on how L-arginine would be converted to nitroimidazole was developed. However, experiments must be conducted to see if the pathway would work in real life, and not just on paper.

Figure 1 – Biosynthetic pathway towards nitroimidazole. Retrieved from: Hedges and Ryan, 2019

Through experimentation, the pathway as shown in figure 1 was deemed to have synthesized nitroimidazole successfully. The next step was to determine whether or not azomycin could be synthesized from Streptomyces cattleya. Unfortunately, they were unsuccessful in detecting any levels of nitroimidazole in the bacteria samples. They concluded that potentially a different molecule had been synthesized, or that this specific gene cluster is silent (inactivate).

Although Hedges and Ryan were unable to find a definitive pathway to synthesizing azomycin utilizing bacteria, their work was able to disprove aa few reaction schemes in the scientific community, allowing for further research to be conducted.

Science is not always about success. In science, you must fail in order to succeed. Their work provides a stepping stone into further scientific research such a finding other biosynthetic pathways in the synthesis of other antibiotics.

 

Literature Cited:

Hedges, J. B.; Ryan, K. S. In Vitro Reconstitution of the Biosynthetic Pathway to the Nitroimidazole Antibiotic Azomycin. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 201958 (34), 11647–11651.

-Jackson Kuan

Assemble Sugars with the Assistance of a “Secret Weapon”—Enzyme

People eat sugar every day, but do you know scientists can make whatever types of sugar they want? A group of researchers led by Dr Stephen Withers from the University of Columbia found an efficient method for creating new sugars. They selected a powerful type of biological catalyst called enzymes, which can assemble certain types of sugar molecules faster and cleaner than other chemical catalysts. This method has potential applications in drug development for diseases such as diabetes and obesity.

Sugars are referred to as a type of molecules that consist of units of hydrocarbons assembled in a long chain. The picture below shows various sugar molecules. Each hexagon represents a sugar unit, and different sugars have different numbers of units. Sugars with only one unit are called monosaccharides. Glucose and fructose are common monosaccharides. Our table sugar has one glucose combined with one fructose and is called disaccharide (of course!). Polysaccharides consist of starch, cellulose, and glycogen (sugar stored in your body). Sugars also exist on the cell surface and act as the receptor for many drug molecules. Therefore, knowing the properties of different sugars and how to synthesize them is an essential topic in modern biology and chemistry.

Figure 1. Sugar in daily life vs. Sugar in chemistry

Despite sugars are important to human, making the desired type of sugar molecules is a tricky problem. The reason is that many sugar units have a unique geometry. To maintain the biological functions of sugars, we also need to keep its original shape. Most of the synthetic chemical methods can assemble the sugar unit in the desired order, but cannot retain the geometry. To solve this problem, Withers and his group decided to use a “secret weapon” in biology—enzymes.

Enzymes are a special type of proteins widely existing in all organisms. They can accelerate the chemical reactions in our body and sustain normal metabolic processes. More importantly, enzymes are highly specific to particular sugar geometry. In other words, they only react with sugars that fit their structures and yield product that also has one specific structure. The type of enzymes accelerates sugar assembly is called glycosynthase, and the type accelerates disassembly is called glycoside hydrolase. Now, using enzymes seem to be promising, but where to find the enzymes we want?

To find the desired enzyme more quickly, scientists used a technique called metagenomics which allows them to sample the genes of millions of microorganisms without the need for individual culture. Instead of directly searching for enzymes that can link the sugar together, the first step is to find enzymes (glycoside hydrolase) which break sugar bond (Surprise!). Researchers used bacteria as factories to produce the enzymes and collect them together. Of course, we want enzyme glycosynthase that LINK sugar bonds. The next step is to reconstruct those enzymes such that they can assemble the sugar correctly. Researchers change the reaction centre of the glycoside hydrolase by muting some of the critical structures. By doing so, some of the glycoside hydrolases betrayed their original duties and started to assemble the sugar unit. Figure 2 shows the overall procedures for the experiment.

Abstract Image

Figure 2. Experimental procedure. Sugars are shown as chair-like hexagons. The aim is to link the sugars to various substrate molecules (shown in different colours).

Eventually, Withers and his group found eight types of enzymes that are specific to the assembly of different sugar molecules, which is almost impossible using traditional methods. As discussed before, sugars construct the receptors for drug and other signal molecules in our body. Understanding how to synthesize sugar will help scientists build new medicines targeted to specific body cells. Diseases such as diabetes and obesity that are related to sugars will also be better understood in the future.

Reference:

Armstrong, Z.; Liu, F.; Chen, H.-M.; Hallam, S. J.; Withers, S. G. Systematic Screening of Synthetic Gene-Encoded Enzymes for Synthesis of Modified Glycosides. ACS Catalysis 2019, 9 (4), 3219–3227.

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acscatal.8b05179

LEGO: Is it more than just a kids toy?

With everyone staying at home due to recent events, a common struggle is finding ways to pass the time. You remember having a box of LEGO bricks lying around, but you think to yourself “Building with LEGO? Nah, that’s just a kid’s toy!”. However, LEGO bricks are more than just a construction toy, they are also a technological marvel both in manufacturing and function.

The LEGO group first patented their iconic LEGO brick design in 1958 in Billund, Denmark. Modern LEGO bricks are made of ABS plastic, a copolymer of acrylonitrile, 1,3-butadiene and styrene, which is formed into its distinct brick-like shape using the injection molding process.  The molds are designed to produce LEGO pieces accurate to up to five-thousandth of a millimeter (0.005 mm), which is around half the thickness of a human hair. This results in a piece defect rate of 0.0018%. In other words, the LEGO manufacturing process produces 18 defective pieces out of every 1 million total pieces produced.

Left to right: Structures of styrene, acrylonitrile and 1,3-butadiene, the main components that make up the plastic used to make LEGO bricks. Source: Sigma-Aldrich

LEGO bricks have become an iconic construction toy due to the endless building possibilities they present. LEGO bricks are connected together through round nubs on top of the brick, known as studs, to tube-based cavities on the bottom of the brick. For instance, six LEGO bricks that are two studs wide by four studs long, commonly referred to as a 2×4 brick, can be combined in 915,103,765 unique ways. This number was determined computationally by mathematics professor  Søren Eilers from the University of Copenhagen in 2005.

(Photo credit: Mark Rubinchik)

Although a LEGO brick may seem like a simple piece of plastic, there is a lot more to it than meets the eye. Next time you’re looking for something to do, why not pull out some LEGO and see how many combinations you can make!

-Mark Rubinchik

Vaccination and Herd Immunity

Herd immunity is often generated through vaccination or widespread infection. For the current Covid-19 pandemic, many scientists and experts advocate social distancing to avoid overwhelming hospitals while buying more time for the inventions of vaccines and treatments. Why is vaccination favored by scientists and medical experts than a widespread infection? How is herd immunity achieved through vaccination?

What is herd immunity?

Herd immunity refers to a means of protecting a whole community from disease by immunizing a critical portion of its populace. Vaccination protects the vaccinated person but also the people who are not immunized. However, to achieve herd immunity, we need a certain percentage of people in a community to be vaccinated.

Herd immunity, the result of a high immunization rate. Source: The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID)

To reach the herd immunity threshold, different vaccination coverages which depend on the basic reproduction number (Ro) are required. Vaccination coverage is the estimated percentage of people who have received specific vaccines. For example, measles, a highly contagious virus, has a Ro value between 12 and 18. This high Ro value calls for a high vaccine coverage which is 92-94%. In other words, to reach the herd immunity threshold, at least 92% of the population needs to be vaccinated.

The higher the vaccine coverage the better…

Does it mean that measles will die out as long as 92% of the population is vaccinated against measles? The answer is no. Dr. Plans-Rubio, an epidemiology expert in Europe, found a significant negative correlation (P<0.05) between the incidence of measles in 2017–2018 in different countries of the European Union and measles vaccination coverage with herd immunity levels in the target measles vaccination population during 2015–2017. According to Dr. Plans-Rubio, low percentages of measles vaccination coverage with two doses of vaccine and the resulting low herd immunity levels explained measles incidence and persistence of measles in the European Union in 2017-2018. To eliminate the measles virus in the European Union, W.H.O must improve routine measles vaccination coverage and conduct supplementary measles vaccination campaigns.

Linear correlation coefficient p
Coverage with two doses of measles vaccine − 0.533 0.003
Coverage with one dose of measles vaccine 0.523 0.004
Coverage with first dose of measles vaccine − 0.332 0.079
Coverage with second dose of measles vaccine − 0.559 0.002
Prevalence of individuals with vaccine-induced measles protection (Iv) − 0.580 0.001
Herd immunity gap (94.5 − Iv)a − 0.580 0.001

(Table source: European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases)

Relating to Covid-19 pandemic

Without measles vaccines, we would not have lowered the mortality rate of measles and reached herd immunity in most countries. The novel coronavirus, similar to measles, is also contagious. To lower the mortality rate of Covid-19 and reach herd immunity, the corresponding vaccine is required. Hence, every single one of us should practice social distancing to avoid overwhelming our healthcare system while scientists strive to invent the corresponding vaccine.

 

Reference:

Plans-Rubio Pedro. Low percentages of measles vaccination coverage with two doses of vaccine and low herd immunity levels explain measles incidence and persistence of measles in the European Union in 2017–2018. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, 2019; 38, 1719-1729. DOI: https://link-springer-com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/article/10.1007%2Fs10096-019-03604-0#Sec2

-Pricia

Sugar Chemistry: A Pathway to Antibiotics

We’ve all heard it endlessly as kids. Don’t eat too much sugar, it’s bad for you. However, what if I told you that sugars aren’t all that bad and in fact, careful changes to its chemistry can lead to life-saving drugs, such as antibiotics! Just last year, researchers at the University of British Columbia, led by Stephen Withers, found a unique way to tinker with sugars’ chemical structures by using molecules in bacteria. The same bacteria found in our poop!

A view of E. Coli, the bacteria that was used by Wither’s and his team. Credits: The Philadelphia Inquirer

Sweet…but what are they?

Before we go further, let’s start with a simple question: What exactly are sugars? Sugars are molecules shaped like hexagons which are often joined to other molecules known as “acceptors”. In a way we are kind of like sugars; we find someone we like, confess how we feel, and they accept our love! Right? Wrong. As we all know the last part rarely happens and this is the same in sugars, as chemists have yet to find easy ways to join the sugar and acceptors. Luckily for sugars (and unluckily for us), Mother Nature has come up with some solutions, using helper molecules known as enzymes.

Curious as to what type of sugars chemists work with? There’s no ambiguity here, chemists use the same molecules found in sugar cubes. Yes! The ones you put in your coffee. Credits: The Verge

a solution under our noses…

Instead of struggling to find ways of joining sugars and acceptors, Wither’s team thought: Why not just use these enzymes? In other words, hijack Mother Nature. To make their idea a reality, they extracted sugar-specific enzymes from E. Coli, a bacterium that lives inside the human digestive tract. Their efforts gave them 175 sugar-specific enzymes, and from this they chose 8 enzymes that were most specific to the type of sugars and acceptors they were interested in.

“With the 8 enzymes in hand, Withers and his team could now easily make these sugar-acceptor linkages” is what I would like to report; however, things are never so simple. It turns out that the sugar-specific enzymes they got from E. Coli did the exact opposite of what they wanted. Instead of forming sugar-acceptor linkages, they were specialized in breaking them.

Unsurprisingly the savvy researchers expected this and already had a reliable strategy to reverse-engineer these enzymes from linkage breakers to linkage makers. You may be wondering how they re-purposed something to work completely opposite of what it was intended for. To reconcile this, think of this example: hammers. If you’re feeling angry one day you would likely use the hammer to smash things. However, if you’re feeling innovative one day, the hammer would help you build things by hammering in nails. These enzymes are similar; an enzyme that breaks sugar bonds differs very little from one that builds sugar bonds.

more than just a bond…

Sugars go way beyond than just satisfying your sugar fix. They are molecules essential to the maintenance and regulation of not only your body, but in most living things! Because they are found everywhere, including infectious bacteria, sugar-based molecules serve as effective antibiotics, however making these drugs are difficult. Why? Well as mentioned before, chemists have trouble making these sugar-acceptor bonds; however, the research done by Wither’s team show that this will not remain the case. On a lighter note, they also created a sugar-based molecule that had nothing to do with health; detergent. This just further shows that these bonds are far-reaching and relevant in many contexts.

Story source

Armstrong, Z.; Liu, F.; Chen, H.-M.; Hallam, S. J.; Withers, S. G. Systematic Screening of Synthetic Gene-Encoded Enzymes for Synthesis of Modified Glycosides. ACS Catalysis 20199 (4), 3219–3227.

-Kenny Lin

Teaching Resonance to Undergrads: How Hard Can It Be?

Resonance structures are a tough concept for chemistry students to understand, and the way they’re being taught has a significant impact on how well they retain the concept. A pair of researchers from the University of Nebraska and the University of Virginia’s Chemistry departments show that explaining the limitations of resonance drawings gives a better understanding than explaining the benefits.

 

The study, published March 13th of this year, took 180 students across 2 different organic chemistry classes with 2 different professors. The first professor focused on highlighting how accurate and beneficial resonance drawings are towards the understanding of the deeper chemistry. The second professor focused on the limitations and shortcomings of resonance drawings, and this approach gave a more accurate understanding of the underlying chemistry.

Reliability of Findings

Quantifying a student’s understanding of a concept is no easy task, so the researchers had to cover multiple facets of understanding. They asked students three questions relating to the underlying understandings of resonance contributors of enolates; written description of resonance hybrids, draw the resonance hybrids, and predict the carbon-oxygen bond length. The answers students gave are graphed below, and show that students in Professor 2’s class had a better understanding of all 3 concepts.

Examples of answers for students asked to draw an enolate resonance hybrid: (a) hybrid structure with correct partial charges (correct answer), (b) hybrid structure, (c) major resonance contributor, (d) minor contributor, and (e) example of other structures (incorrect). Source: Xue, D., Stains, M.

Students’ understanding of resonance hybrids between two professors analyzed through (a) written descriptions of the resonance hybrid, (b) drawings of the resonance hybrid, and (c) carbon-oxygen bond length predictions. Source: Xue, D., Stains, M.

This study did a great job of explaining the ways in which students can misunderstand resonance hybrids, and the pitfalls that professors need to stray students away from. However, teaching styles are not quantifiable, only qualitative observations can be made. This makes any differences possibly anecdotal. Further uncertainty is introduced by limiting the categories that a given student’s answer could fall under. This could “round up” some students to appear to understand more than they do, or vice versa.   Professor 2 also had 8 fewer students than Professor 1. This means Professor 1 had 109.4% the number of students that Professor 2 had, making the population sizes of the two groups significantly different in size.

Despite these possible problems with the methodology and certainty of this research, I think we can all empathize with how tough these concepts were at first. And to lighten the tone, I’ll share this analogy that Professor 2 used in his class to help his students learn. Hope it brings a smile to your face!

Analogy used by Professor 2 to teach about resonance. Source: Xue, D., Stains, M.

  • Griffin Bare

Surgery can activate cancer cells, but aspirin stops metastasis

When patients are diagnosed with breast cancer, the cancer cells have already metastasized to another part of the body. However, the number of cancer cells involved in this process is negligible, and current equipment cannot detect them. Cancer cells after metastasis remain inactive, which seems unlikely to threaten patients’ health. Nevertheless, those dormant cancer cells are time bombs. One way to set them off, surprisingly, is through cancer surgery.

Recent research led by Dr. Robert Weinberg of the Whitehead Institute found the mechanisms that may explain why surgeries activate the hidden cancer cells. They designed a set of comparison experiments based on mice that injected with breast cancer cells and observed how breast cancer developed in different conditions.

To simulate the postoperative recovery process, scientists implanted sterile sponges in the mice injected with breast cancer cells. This “unnatural” design may be controversial, but it maintains all animals experiencing the same experimental conditions.

“Weinberg gets some pushback because he works on artificial systems, but this is often the only way to expose fundamental principles of biology.” said biologist Sui Huang, professor of the Institute for Systems Biology, who was convinced by this experiment.[1]

Figure 1. (A) Schematic illustrating the experimental design. Mice had been previously wounded by sponge implantation at one or two distant sites. (B) Tumor diameter during the one-month experiment. (C) Tumor incidence as a function of time (n = 9 to 10 per group) for the experimental and control group. Data are plotted as means ± SEM. P values were calculated using the Mann-Whitney test (P < 0.05). Source: Translational Medicine Science

One month after the surgery, researchers tested the number of cancer cells that remained in mice’s bodies. Figure 1 summarizes the results: for those that accepted the surgery, 60% of mice developed tumors in other parts of the body. While in the comparison group, the value is only 15%. Based on the results from 270 mice, Weinberg concluded that surgery could accelerate the cancer cell metastasis and even facilitate tumor formation.

The reason for the effect, as explained in the paper, has to do with the immune system. During the surgical wound recovery process, the inflammatory response restricts the immune system. Therefore, the “guard cells” cannot effectively monitor the cancer cells, resulting in metastasis and tumor formation.

Figure 2. Tumor diameter after the injection of cancer cells into previously unwounded (left) or wounded (right) mice treated with saline or meloxicam (n = 15 mice per group). Data are plotted as means ± SEM. P values were calculated the Mann-Whitney test P < 0.0005. Source: Translational Medicine Science

The good news is common pain killers, such as aspirin, can efficiently inhibit this process. Scientists found that many nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs can effectively suppress tumor formation resulting from surgical wounds. Figure 2 shows that the wounded mice had a constant tumor size at around 2mm after given meloxicam, while the comparison developed tumors at average 5mm. Note the experiment only tested meloxicam; aspirin was also proved to be effective in the follow-up research.

Although the results are quite delightful, whether we can apply the same experiment to humans remains unclear. Weinberg pointed out that the aim of the investigation is not telling people not to trust lumpectomy or other tumor surgeries but develop a more effective treatment for postoperative recovery. He hoped that this research would promote further experiment on human and test whether drugs like aspirin has the same effect in the human body.

What is N95? ——The knowledge about face masks

Facing the outbreak of the new coronavirus, all kinds of face masks were sold out in the blink of an eye. More and more people seem to start to realize the importance of face masks.  But, do face masks really work? and how they work?

The answer largely depends on what type of face mask you are wearing.

Classification of Face Masks

According to the design of the face masks, the general ranking of the protective ability is (high to low): N95 masks> surgical masks> ordinary medical masks> ordinary cotton masks. But in the case of the new coronavirus, the most effective type of face masks are medical-surgical masks and masks filtering 95% or more of non-oily particles, such as N95, KN95, DS2, FFP2, etc. At present, China’s medical face masks are mainly divided into three types: medical protective masks with the highest protection level, medical-surgical masks commonly used in invasive operating environments such as operating rooms, and ordinary disposable medical masks.

 

How Face Masks Work?

Usually, medical face masks are made of non-woven fabrics, and its raw materials are mainly Polypropylene. And polypropylene layers are arranged to form an SMS structure.

SMS structure makes face masks capable to block floating particles while allowing airflow in and out the face masks. In this structure, the key material that brings the virus filtering effect is a high density, electrostatic layer lies in the middle: melt-blown non-woven fabric. When small particles like viruses get close to the melt-blown nonwoven fabric, it will be immediately captured by the electrostatic field and adsorbed on the surface of the non-woven fabric, and therefore prevent the virus gets into the body.
Yicheng Zhu