Category Archives: Science Communicators

Acne Medication Responsible for Infant Deaths and Teen Suicides

With promising results of clear skin and boosts of self confidence, many choose to commit to the Accutane (a drug to be taken daily 4-6 months as acne treatment). As heroic as the drug may sound as advertised by pharmaceuticals, researchers have found alarming side effects of Accutane users, including bowel disease, birth defects, depression, and suicide.

Image from: http://www.etrebelle.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Acne.jpg

Acne is reported to be the most commonly seen skin disease amongst teenagers with an average of 4 in every 5 teens suffering from constant breakouts. Although most common treatments are sold as over-the-counter drugs, patients who suffer from severe acne are often referred by dermatologiests to go on Accutane.

Image from: http://www.njlawjournal.com/image/EM/NJ/accutane-Article-201412301735.jpg

It was reported that 43% of pregnant women on Accutane treatments have babies suffering from fetus defects and deaths. After Accutane was identified as the most toxic drugs for embryos, Britain introduced laws that require women to undergo abortion when pregnancies occur during Accutane treatments.

Another equally or rather more serious side of effect of Accutane is suicide. Researches have shown that Accutane users have approximately 21% decrease in orbitofrontal cortex activity (region of the brain responsible for cognitive decision making). This may explain the 11% suicidal rates amongst accutane users.

Image from: http://mypregnanthealth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Why-is-My-Belly-Button-Painful-During-Pregnancy.jpg

Is it worth it? Even with all the known side effects and precautions of Accutane, doctors are prescribing these pills to more and more patients. Most teens often resort to Accutane as a solution due to embarrassment and lowered self confidence caused by acne. However, non-medical methods including drinking sufficient amounts of water and having quality sleep is not only effective, but also risk free. On top of that, as a society we can eliminate discrimination towards those with acne to avoid embarrassment and loss of self confidence.

 

Lisa Liang

Image

All Aboard the Hype Train!

Recall the most recent technological or scientific breakthrough that you were hyped about – a new Apple product, SpaceX, coffee mugs that charge your phone, or one of the other innumerable findings in the realm of science. How long did the excitement last before – and after- the slated release of the technology you have in mind? When it finally arrived were you satisfied, let down, or left somewhere in between?

In the field of genetics, a new approach which utilizes the CRISPR (pronounced as crisper) mechanism to edit the genomic DNA of a target host holds great potential and is seen as the next “big thing”. CRISPR and its associated genes (cas) are part of an immune system used by prokaryotes to identify and degrade foreign DNA. Geneticists have modified the CRISPR/cas system to help them accomplish amazing feats. Compared to previous methods of genetic modification, CRISPR/cas is far more streamlined and efficient.

The CRISPR/cas mechanism has seen numerous applications in fields ranging from botany, pathology, and even oncology. CRISPR/cas has also proven to be able to restore the non-functional gene which leads to sickle cell anemia.

The hype behind this emerging technology should be kept in check, however, as CRISPR/cas is not a magic bullet. Though its potential seems limitless, it does have technical limitations. Furthermore, an international consortium on stem cells, ethics, and law known as The Hinxton Group has released a statement warning about the potential dangers of unfettered application of CRISPR/cas to biomedical research.

We know that the media and the scientific community both love to get excited over new and upcoming technologies, and the hype for CRISPR is no different. As potential consumers and beneficiaries of CRISPR/cas mediated treatments, we like to hear about the wonders of this emergent technology. However, as scientists and communicators, we ultimately have to be careful that we do not lead ourselves and our target audience through the hype cycle. Over promising and underperforming is a hallmark of bad science, and is something we should strive to avoid.

Critical Period for Language Acquisition

Imagine being isolated, deprived of basic rights, and abused for accidentally making a slight noise. In 1970, the theory of a critical period for language acquisition was tested when a social worker found Genie, a 13-year-old girl, isolated, abused, and underdeveloped. A critical period is a window of time in development for an organism to learn an ability. It is said that after this period, the chances of acquiring the ability are very low if any and after a certain age the ability stays at the same level.

The best time to learn a certain ability is called a critical period.

For language acquisition, this critical period is estimated to be from the age of two to puberty. Well if everyone reaches puberty at different times then isn’t it possible for this critical period to be different in everyone if it does exist at all? Genie, also known as the Wild Child, emerged from isolation after puberty with no linguistic performance and was said to have the mental capabilities of a one year old. So doctors and psychologists had to work with her to improve her mobility, and cognitive function.

The first publicly released picture of Genie at the age of 13.

With their help, Genie learned how to form short sentences of three to four words having the communication abilities of a toddler by the age of 16. This shows that Genie counteracts the theory of the critical period for language acquisition. Meaning that learning language skills is still possible after reaching puberty. From other research, it is also clear that at a younger age learning a language is easier but there is no evidence of strict boundaries for the critical period. The critical period for learning language should either be revised to have new boundaries or dismissed all together.

Some researchers actually prefer calling it a ‘sensitive’ instead of a ‘critical’ period. This might be more accurate as a sensitive period is defined as an extended period after which learning is still possible. I think having a sensitive period for language acquisition would be more appropriate in Genie’s case as she still learned language skills after puberty.

The theory of a critical period for language acquisition still influences much of the research based in developmental and behavioural psychology that occurs today. It is especially prominent in neurological research for the development of the brain and for cognitive mapping. So, if the critical period theory still influences some research today and it is clearly unreliable in Genie’s case then shouldn’t this theory be tested and researched to a much greater extent?

By: Sukhvir Toor