Spring 2016

TRIPLE

HELIX

ORGANS

a new era of 3D printing page 8

EATING GREEN the sustainability of organic food page 10

NEW FRONTIERS the groundbreaking implications of gene editing page 22

MAKING

WAVES the impact of discovering gravitational waves page 14

letter from the president

triple helix spring 2016

HELLO.

Thank you for picking up a copy of The Triple Helix’s Spring 2016 journal. We are very excited to showcase our work from this semester and update you on our progress.

As you may know, The Triple Helix at Berkeley was reactivated in Fall of 2015, after a five year hiatus. Over the past two semesters, over 30 club members worked tirelessly to help publish our Fall and Spring Semester issues. Our Fall 2015 publication was widely circulated among the UC Berkeley community, The Triple Helix International Community and the private sector. The UC Berkeley community has been ecstatic about our return to campus and we are very grateful to welcome our faculty advisor, Silvia Bunge. We are incredibly humbled by the private companies that praised our journal and we are lucky to have obtained corporate sponsorship for the Spring 2016 issue. Additionally, we are very grateful for the continued support of The Triple Helix International Team; they encouraged us to reactivate The Triple Helix at Berkeley this past summer, and have since been a great resource for us here at Cal. They also honored our outstanding design team as our very own Chief of Layout Design Goldia Kiteck was cordially invited to be an international officer for the organization.

As the president and EIC of The Triple Helix at Berkeley, we are incredibly humbled and excited about our progress over the past year. The Triple Helix at Berkeley went from a small idea to a physical reality within just months. We are so proud that The Triple Helix has given undergraduates the opportunity to expand their academic and extracurricular horizons through researching, discussing and writing about issues in science they are passionate about. Our writers, editors, and designers are all incredibly bright and inspiring people, and we are so thankful to have learned from all of them over the past year. We graduate this spring confident that this organization will only grow in size and strength, and look forward to seeing this publication flourish.

With that, we’re signing off. It’s been an incredible privilege to serve The Triple Helix at Berkeley. We hope that you enjoy reading our magazine as much as we enjoyed putting it together.

rebecca ocher president merrill weber editor-in-chief

2

Aristotle Univ.

Arizona State Brown Carnegie Mellon Cornell

Dartmouth Emory GWU Georgetown Georgia Tech

Harker Harvard Johns Hopkins McGill Univ.

Northwestern

Calgary Cambridge Berkeley UC San Diego UChicago

CHAPTERS Edinburgh Glasgow WashU Wayne State Yale

contents

4

scientists continue to look for extraterrestial life

6

12

17

STEM

an educational path that is not for everyone

8

10

14

THE SEARCH

20

ORGANS

a new era of 3D printing

22

EATING GREEN

the sustainability of organic food

SCIENCE TO BE SCARED ABOUT

what do we really feel when we watch suspense?

26

24

MAKING WAVES

the discovery of gravitational waves through a century of scientific research

THINNING OUT DIET TRENDS

scientists attempt to find the healthiest diet

GREEN ISN’T ALWAYS CLEAN

the environmental cost of solar energy NEW FRONTIERS

the groundbreaking implications of gene editing VACCINATION OR BUST?

the potentialy life saving HPV vaccine has been inciting controversy in the media

SCOPING THE FUTURE

the next generation of telescopes aids the search for life-sustaining exoplanets

ABOUT Our publication, Science in Society, is comprised of the work completed by students from The Triple Helix at Berkeley. The Triple Helix at Berkeley is a chapter of an undergraduate organization focused on the promotion of interdisciplinary discussion of current scientific topics. At an international level, students from over twenty-five universities around the world collaborate to analyze and discuss socially relevant issues in today’s scientific community. After a hiatus of several of years, The Triple Helix has returned to Berkeley, and our chapter is looking forward to growing in the coming years. Our organization hopes to inspire scientific curiosity and informed discussion on topics affecting society today. If you have any questions or comments about The Triple Helix at Berkeley, please contact thetriplehelix.berkeley@gmail.com.

STAFF

president

rebecca ocher

editor-in-chief

merrill weber

chief graphic design

goldia kiteck design team

goldia kiteck jessica zhuge ginger engel miranda hart

vp programming

shannon lee

secretary

jonathan lee editors

brenna wylder megan lee catriona lewis sara lopez

vp recruitment

rebecca harpster

vp marketing

laura jetter

writers

patrick lee monica cassandras madison smith sabrina berger sara lopez jessica yescas rachael klaiss maria krasinilkov anastasiia zhelokhovtseva sponsored by asuc

THE TRIPLE HELIX SPRING 2016

3

the

SEARCH scientists continue to look for extraterrestial life by sara lopez

A

re we alone? If not, in what form do we expect to encounter aliens?

Science fiction often portrays them as little green men, terrifying creatures, or cute otherworldly robots. The search for extraterrestrial intelligence, more commonly referred to as SETI, is a field in astrophysics that encompasses all of our efforts to find alien intelligence in outer space. In fact, SETI is a very serious research effort that first began in the early 1900s, with modern experiments beginning in 1959 and onwards [1]. Frank Drake, a pioneer of SETI, engineered an equation that determines the likelihood of finding intelligent civilizations within the Milky Way Galaxy, known as the Drake Equation.

Astronomers are searching the stars across all sections of the electromagnetic spectrum, from radio signals to optical light and infrared radiation, looking for any signs of alien communication and intelligent life. It takes a global effort to extrapolate the data and make sense of it, and the Bay Area, especially Berkeley, plays a large role in the progress of SETI. One of the biggest research centers is located right here in Silicon Valley. The SETI Institute is a nonprofit organization founded in 1984. It is organized into three branches: the Center for SETI Research, the Carl Sagan Center, and the Center for Education and Public Outreach [1].

The Center for SETI Research focuses primarily on advances in software and technology, and their former director was UC Berkeley astronomy student Jill Tarter.

Questions of astrobiology, the study of life beyond Earth, and the habitability of other planets are addressed at the Carl Sagan Center, a tribute to the popular host of Cosmos who captivated the nation

4

with his TV mini-series during the 1980s.

Lastly, and arguably the most important component of the SETI Institute, is the Center for Education and Public Outreach.

EPO provides curriculum, activities, and podcasts designed to inspire and encourage young students to pursue careers in SETI and astrobiology, astrophysics, and science in general. Taken together, all three branches of the SETI Institute promote the research of the origins of life and the universe as a whole, the most fundamental -- and philosophical -- mystery in science.

Like most astrophysical research, the SETI Institute is almost entirely funded by private donations and grants [1]. In recent years, however, there has been growing support for SETI. The Royal Society of London hosted the biggest SETI announcement of 2015: Russian entrepreneur and physicist Yuri Milner joined renowned theoretical physicist and cosmologist Stephen Hawking, along with other prominent figures such as Geoff Marcy, former astronomer and professor at UC Berkeley, to announce the $100 million Breakthrough Initiatives. This donation will give SETI the surge of funding that is required for the research to advance. The initiative’s main program Breakthrough Listen is said to be “the most powerful, comprehensive and intensive scientific search ever undertaken for signs of intelligent life beyond Earth.” [3] Over the span of ten years, scientists will be taking a closer look at the one million closest stars, the galactic center and the plane of our Milky Way Galaxy, and 100 of the closest galaxies, searching for any signs of intelligent life and the habitability of exoplanets. The search will make use of the world’s most powerful telescopes, including the Automated Planet Finder

Telescope at Lick Observatory, just an hour drive from Berkeley. Breakthrough Listen is an enormous step for SETI with unprecedented results in the years to come.

One of the project’s leaders is UC Berkeley astronomer Andrew Siemion, who completed his undergraduate and graduate career here at Cal and continues to work as the director of Berkeley SETI Research Center. I sat down with Siemion to learn more about Berkeley’s role in SETI. Specifically, I wanted to know how Berkeley and the Bay Area seemingly become the center of the universe. “For a long time the largest SETI research center was at NASA Ames,” he started, “but now Berkeley is the biggest SETI group in the world.” Siemion explained that Bernard Oliver was an early pioneer of SETI who later founded Hewlett Packard laboratories, largely regarded as the beginning of Silicon Valley. Because Oliver, NASA Ames, and the SETI Institute were all centered in Silicon Valley, UC Berkeley naturally became a hub of SETI research as well. Here is an excerpt from our interview in which Siemion shares his connection to SETI and how it can impact the rest of our world:

it’s probably traveled thousands of light years. Our galaxy is 100 thousand light years across, so we’re seeing that civilization as it was thousands of years ago. Because our civilization is so young, that civilization that we encountered would be much more advanced than we are. We are perhaps seeing our own future. By doing SETI experiments we are asking ourselves: What is the end state of a technological civilization? How long can technological progression proceed? Can we survive another 100 thousand years treating each other and our Earth the way we do?”

Having a big network is crucial to SETI -- it would be impossible to accelerate this field without the help of scientists, and civilians, around the world. To achieve this, Dan Werthimer, who works alongside Siemion at the Berkeley SETI Research Center in addition to the Berkeley Space Sciences Lab, developed SETI@home.

This software allows any user with an Internet-connected computer to download a program that would use your computer’s idle time to search through radio signals.

The extra computer power from over five million participants around the world creates a virtual supercomputer, allowing more sensitive signals to be detected over a greater range of frequencies [4]. Because of SETI’s “insatiable thirst for computing power,” SETI@home not only encourages us to be interested in their research, it needs us. SETI is a unique field in science in that it really is dependent on a global effort; it’s not necessary to be a scientist to contribute to this project and make a difference. Plus, the software comes with a neat screensaver!

I think intelligence is the most interesting part of the universe to me. Even if we managed to simulate life, would we ever have life evolving intelligence? The emergence of life and intelligence is as fundamental a question as how the universe began… There’s something very special about the Drake Equation. Philip Morrison called it the “archaeology of the future.” When we receive a signal from another civilization,

references [1] SETI Institute [Internet]. Seti.org. 2016 [cited 13

Breakthroughinitiatives.org.

March 2016]. Available from: http://www.seti.org/

13

[2] The Drake Equation, developed by U.S.

breakthroughinitiatives.org/

radio

Drake.

Available

from:

http://

[Internet].

[4] The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence at UC Berkeley [Internet]. The Search for

http://www.noeticscience.co.uk/wp-content/

Extraterrestrial Intelligence at UC Berkeley. 2016

uploads/2013/04/drake-equation.jpg

[cited 13 March 2016]. Available from: https://seti.

Breakthrough

Frank

2016].

[cited

2016 [cited 13 March 2016]. Available from:

[3]

astronomer

March

2015

Initiatives

[Internet].

berkeley.edu/

THE TRIPLE HELIX SPRING 2016

5

S

T

E

M

an educational path that is not for everyone by madison smith

W

ashers, dryers, air conditioners, the internet, elevators, smartphones, touch screens, the bridge one drives across to get into the city, apps that do everything from predict the day’s weather to bring live updates from around the world, and so many other seemingly insignificant parts of our daily lives: we use these without much thought at all. They are an integral part of how we function day to day, and their existence is taken for granted by most. We never think of how much convenience these add to our lives, much less the amount of scientific knowledge and skill that went into making them, nor do we realize that these are made possible by the rapid development of technology in recent decades, and the innovators behind it. From the small tools we use, to the towering buildings and bridges, all would be nothing without scientists, engineers, physicists and their discoveries. Unfortunately, recent studies have shown that less and less college students in the US are pursuing an education in these fields; majors in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics -- known as STEM majors -- have seen a definite decrease in applicants. There are many theories as to why this is the case, including the difficulty of STEM classes, the effect of gender and race, and the societal mindset regarding the type of people who succeed in these fields.

6

STEM majors have certainly gained a notorious reputation for being more difficult than others. Examining class averages and grade distributions, this appears to be very true. For example, as a student at UC Berkeley, it is not uncommon for a physics examination to have an average of 40%, or for this to be described by the professor as proof that the students “did really well” for that test.

Studies have even empirically shown that “STEM field departments are the most difficult grading departments at most colleges,” implying that these students will need to put in much more arduous work in order to earn the same grades as their non-STEM peers [1]. This also influences many students to switch their majors before they declare by the end of their sophomore year. The effects of grades on this decision is shown by those that choose to persist in STEM majors, as they tend to have a higher average GPA by .2 GPA points [1]. This exemplifies that those with a lower GPA, the result of primarily STEM prerequisites or purposefully difficult “weeder” classes, are much more likely to leave the STEM field for another area. In addition, undergraduate students who had higher GPAs in high school were more likely to persist in STEM majors. One could infer from this that these students who choose to switch out of STEM feel that they are not smart enough for those

classes, majors, and jobs; however, students who took more Advanced Placement STEM courses in high school are more likely to have both a higher GPA and a higher retention rate, demonstrating that it may be mere exposure and experience that could encourage students to remain in STEM. Despite this, it could very well be the exposure and experience itself that is helping some STEM students earn higher grades than others, and, in turn, make them more likely to remain. The rigor of undergraduate STEM prerequisite classes certainly appears to be a contributing factor to the increasing amount of students choosing other majors.

While all STEM students face strenuous classes, female and minority students have been shown to be significantly less likely to choose STEM majors. Only 25% of STEM careers are held by women, and a mere 15% of engineering degrees are earned by minorities, compared to the 43% of the US minority population [5]. Both women and minorities are being underrepresented by more than half [5]. Even when they initially choose a STEM major, “minority students make up 44% of those that persist and 54% of those that don’t” [1]. These drastic numbers prove the clear distinction these groups have, but researchers have not been able to conclude why this is the case. However, some studies have

begun to show what can increase female and minority involvement. Some connect lower minority STEM retention to a lower education: minorities are more likely to grow up in poor neighborhoods with minimal schooling, which could very much have a large influence on their secondary education choices [1].

Additionally, once these students arrive at college, they observe the clear underrepresentation of women and minorities in STEM in the demographics of the staff. This may not directly discourage these groups from pursuing and committing to STEM, but studies have shown that an increase in the number of female graduate student instructors and mentors correlates with a higher female STEM retention rate. This implies that continuing to hire women in STEM will lead to more female interest and persistence. It is possible that even the under-representation of the student body itself is discouraging to women, as it was found in one university’s freshman class that 34% were men initially majoring in STEM and only 13% were women [1].

Lastly, the effect of grades, as discussed previously, seems to be stronger with women. Lower grades results in a higher fraction of women leaving STEM than men, while a .1 increase in GPA increases the chances of men to remain by 5.3%, but women only by 3.8% [1]. Whether it is a lack of grades or relatable mentors alone, or a combination of the two in a need for women to encourage female students to persevere despite difficult classes, it is clear that the greatest increase in STEM development can only come from women and ethnic minorities.

Stereotypes, whether about women and minorities in STEM, or about STEM students in general, prove to be a complicating factor in its decreasing level of interest. Hank Green, of the wellknown Vlogbrothers YouTube channel, describes the issue not as being too hard, or too exclusive, but as a simple matter of carrying the wrong mindset. He believes that the biggest obstacle keeping students out of STEM is only the belief that these subjects are beyond the capability of some

students. While he admits that those classes are highly difficult, he argues that there is no inherent skill of being “good at math” or “good at science” that allows certain students to succeed, but rather, it’s a love for problem-solving and learning [3].

This is why he has partnered with Emerson, a technology and engineering company, to make science fun and accessible for prospective students [2, 4]. In the space of 5 minutes or less, Green is able to hold the attention of his audience, and teach them the basics of brand new concepts. His teaching style satisfies and encourages the interest of young students in STEM that the US needs. Rodney Adkins, of IBM, agrees that “maintaining an enthusiasm for science, technology, engineering and math throughout high school and college” is of vital importance. He is a proponent of public-private partnerships, in which companies partner with schools that combine high school and junior college [5]. At these schools, students go through grades 9-14, and work with mentors from companies like IBM, gaining experience, real-world insight, and hopefully a desire to continue working with STEM in a similar way [5]. Sources such as Green’s YouTube videos are beginning to help bring STEM to all types of people, and are the first steps in the necessary mindset change of what a STEM student looks like.

The demanding classes, gender and ethnic gap, and societal perception are all having a vast and negative effect on the life choices by young students across the United States and, in turn, on the population of our workforce. In order to keep up with the rate of technological and scientific development the world has seen, we need those STEM students to continue on to become researchers, engineers, technicians, biologists, and practitioners.

While the issues keeping them from doing so may seem too broad and complicated to overcome, the solutions are straightforward.

Changing the mindset regarding grades, shifting emphasis from performance to effort, and encouraging working on problem-solving as opposed to passing the test could greatly help those who

are severely dissuaded from STEM by a belief of inability. A small act of a female or minority teacher reaching out to a student could alter the course of his or her career and life. Taking down the notion that science is only for nerds, “naturally smart” students, or that it is inaccessible to anyone in any way will open the doors to more people to pursue STEM. These small changes in individual lives are the ones that will lead to greater changes for all through the benefits brought to us by science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

references [1] Griffith A. Persistence of women and minorities in STEM field majors: Is it the school that matters?. Economics of Education Review.

2010;29(6):911-922.

[2] We <3 STEM [Internet]. Emerson.com. 2016 [cited 12 March 2016]. Available from: http:// www.emerson.com/en-us/Pages/STEM.aspx?cm_sp=STEM-_-ilovestem-_-V [3] Green H. Why Are Fewer People Studying Science and Engineering? [Internet]. 2016 [cited 12 March 2016]. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHzgdTPi2CM [4] Forbes. Forbes CMO Interview: Emerson’s Kathy Button Bell, Joined By Star Vlogger Hank Green [Internet]. 2016 [cited 12 March 2016].

Available

from:

https://www.youtube.com/

watch?v=wv1H3bcPUnA [5] Adkins R. Forbes Welcome [Internet].

Forbes.com. 2016 [cited 12 March 2016].

Available from: http://www.forbes.com/sites/ forbesleadershipforum/2012/07/09/america-desperately-needs-more-stem-students-heres-how-to-get-them/#4b1cfbc328ea

THE TRIPLE HELIX SPRING 2016

7

organs

medical

a new era of 3D printing

by anastasiia zhelokhovtseva illustrations by willow yang

the

“

If we could create kidneys from scratch, we could potentially eliminate waiting lists and save millions of lives

“

8

auditorium is filled with excitement and anticipation.

A fragile woman is walking out on the stage. She is a surgeon, and she used to work in a federal death row prison to collect executed inmates’ organs to use for transplant recipients. At the Berkeley TED talks this past February, Dr. Lim shared her story about organ transplantology and its future. Years ago, when Dr. Lim was working in a prison, 3D printing was not even on the scientific horizon.

Now, technology is developing so rapidly that in the near future we may be able to 3D print almost anything, including human organs.

From printing 3D airway tissue to save a little boy’s life to printing entire organs and life-like models for future surgeons to practice on, 3D printing technology can revolutionize medicine, but it also may have a significant impact on our society.

A three-month-old boy in Ann Arbor, Michigan has yet to realize that the implantation of a 3D printed airway into his tracheal pipe has saved his life [2]. In February 2012, a surgical team from University of Michigan performed an unusual operation on a baby born with tracheobronchomalacia, which means that some part of his lung tissue was

permanently collapsed. The operation was very dangerous considering the baby’s age and the area of damage. To save the boy’s life, doctors took a CT scan of his body and converted it to a 3D image. Using this image, they created a 3D printed tube. The tube was then inserted into the lungs. Made out of a biocompatible material, the tube was elastic and flexible enough to grow with the boy until his lung tissue cells grew over it and the tube would dissolve.

Today scientists and engineers can only 3D print tissue, vessels, and skin; however, 3D printing of organs is already being researched and it will change the field of transplantology forever. When it comes to printing big, complicated organs, scientists still have a ways to go.

The interior of each organ is lined with multiple layers of cells interacting with each other. For example, there are about a million tiny nephrons in a kidney.

While it is already possible to grow kidney cells and nephrons individually, scientists haven’t yet succeeded in populating an organ with those cells and keeping it fed with blood and nutrients.

For Doctor Atala at Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine there was no question about what he wanted to work on. As it was mentioned in the Smithsonian magazine, “About eight out of ten patients on a transplant list need a kidney,” and “according to a recent estimate, they wait an average of four and a half years for a donor, often in serious pain”[1]. If we could create kidneys from scratch, we could potentially eliminate waiting lists and save millions of lives.

3D printing may dramatically change not only medicine but also

to access it, and those for whom it will be completely inaccessible. Even though medicine is aiming to provide equal and unbiased treatment to any person in need, the high costs of bioengineered organs might be available only to people on transplant lists who can financially afford it. Another issue with development of widespread 3D printing could be the use of 3D printing for human enhancement.

Should people be able to purchase better lungs, which would utilize oxygen more efficiently?

Should they be able to elect to get stronger bones and muscles even if the procedure is unnecessary?

Can development of this technology lead to a new era of a military arms race between nations [4]?

And finally, and most importantly, will that make us less human? With this technology on the horizon, we need to begin addressing these questions.

Despite the uncertainty of its future implications, 3D printing is still an exciting development that is already saving lives and will save millions in the future.

It will challenge humanity to raise ethical questions and provide new solutions.

Today, it is up to a global community to set the precedent of how 3D printing will be used medically.

references

1.Shaer M. Soon, Your Doctor Could Print a Human

Models of Your Organs Before Surgery [Internet].

Organ on Demand [Internet]. Smithsonian. 2015

Smithsonian. 2015 [cited 15 March 2016]. Available

[cited 15 March 2016]. Available from: http://www.

from: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/

smithsonianmag.com/innovation/soon-doctor-

doctors-can-study-3d-printed-models-your-organs-

print-human-organ-on-demand-180954951/?no-ist

surgery-180955622/?no-ist

2. Groopman J. Print Thyself - The New Yorker

4. 3D printing raises ethical issues in medicine

[Internet]. The New Yorker. 2014 [cited 15 March

[Internet]. Abc.net.au. 2015 [cited 15 March 2016].

2016]. Available from: http://www.newyorker.com/

Available

magazine/2014/11/24/print-thyself

articles/2015/02/11/4161675.htm

from:

people “Should be able to

purchase better lungs, which would utilize oxygen more efficiently?

“

the way medicine is taught. At Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts, a medical team has made a non-working individual 3D model of a patient’s heart. Just by looking at the model, the surgeon knew that the previously chosen method of operating wouldn’t have worked [3]. Today, doctors may not only have a better perception of the procedure by having a look at more realistic models, but they may be able to minimize tissue damage and be more exact in their technique. Medical surgery may soon be focusing solely on patient-specific treatments and procedures. Using realistic models, medical students will soon be able to practice rare or dangerous procedures multiple times before seeing a real patient.

This can significantly reduce risks of going into surgery for future generations.

There is no doubt that 3D printing of organs will save millions of lives and increase longevity in the future.

However, with the advancement of a technology that is completely new, our society will have to address possible social implications of 3D printing. Can there be a potential discrimination of people with bioengineered organs? In the near future, but perhaps not in our lifetime, people could be walking around with synthetic hearts, livers and other vital organs. Can the technology widen the inequalities and disparities in healthcare even more? The idea of 3D printing and organ modeling can shift medicine to be a very personalized field. It will take many years before 3D printing will be a lowcost procedure; in the meantime, there will be people who will have more resources

http://www.abc.net.au/science/

3. Donahue M. Doctors Can Study 3D Printed

THE TRIPLE HELIX SPRING 2016

9

E

the sustainability of organic food by jessica yescas

ating organic has been an increasingly popular lifestyle change-- some might even call it a “trendy” thing to do. Although thislifestyle change might seem intriguing, eating organic based solely on the trend of the time might not be the best choice. In addition to following popular food movements, there are other aspects of choosing organic that are just as intriguing but less emphasized in the media: the overwhelming benefits for the environment.

The conscious choice to eat organic should be made with all sides of the argument taken into consideration. Although choosing to eat organic for health benefits is common, people can also choose to eat organic for its environmentally friendly effects. The topic of sustainable eating has been thrown around frequently in the past years. Scientists strongly believe that eating organic not only has nutritional benefits for the consumer, but also for the environment in which the food is produced. One study in the Journal of Environmental Management acknowledges that “organic farming has been recognized as one of the most reasonable alternatives to conventional agriculture for overcoming the crisis of climate change” [1]. Making the choice to eat organic could potentially carry a heavier weight on improving the environment than simply eating better for individual health.

Studies conducted in Denmark demonstrated various environmental benefits to organic farming. Not only is organic farming shown to be beneficial for the environment in which it is cultivated, but beneficial to the organisms in the soil, the aquatic life, and the ecosystem as a whole [2]. During the process

10

green of organic farming, soil fertility and animal welfare increase, while synthetic pesticide usage simultaneously decreases. Soil fertility is more prosperous through organic farming because the soil is less likely to have been used to mass produce conventional crops. Fewer pesticides used to cultivate our food means fewer pesticides in the surrounding environment, so soil fertility is actually enhanced through organic farming.

In addition to soil, water quality is also integral to environment health. Eating organic improves the quality of water by reducing the amount of pesticides in water sources. Typically, after agricultural fields are sprayed with pesticides or herbicides, the excess chemicals ends up in water runoff from the agricultural practice. This polluted water is then introduced to the entire ecosystem causing the disruption of the surrounding ecosystems. Of course, not only are the ecosystems negatively affected, but also the communities of people who depend on these water sources.

Organic foods are defined as foods grown without conventional pesticides or artificial fertilizers [3]. However, some argue that the pesticides used to grow organic foods still have a negative effect on the environment. Furthermore, although organic foods boast endless benefits for the body, it has been found that the use of natural pesticides can also be harmful to the human body. Organic foods typically use pesticides called neonicotinoids—an organic pesticide derived from nicotine. Since these pesticides are not chemically derived, they are better for the environment—but not necessarily better for consumers. These organic pesticides can be just

as harmful to humans as the synthetic pesticides used in conventional produce. People consider organic products to be “safer” because of the lack of understanding and information surrounding eating organic. Nevertheless, they should consider that although eating organic might result in lower toxicity levels that benefit the environment, it might not do the same for us humans.

Moreover, the case for organic eating is a topic quite relevant to the Cal community, and could benefit the general campus. The UC Berkeley campus has been taking initiative to achieve its Zero Waste by 2020 goal by being environmentally sustainable on campus in practically every manner of sustainability. If UC Berkeley continues to take the steps it is currently taking, the campus will remain on track for its goal. However, if Cal had the ability to switch on-campus food providers from conventional to organic,a change of this magnitude would have an even more positive environmental effect.

The concept of eating organic now holds substantial power in the fight towards improving the planet’s health. The practice of non-organic farming using synthetic chemicals to get rid of pests and herbs is harmful to both humans and the environment. Although natural pesticides can still negatively affect our health, organic farming ensures that these synthetic chemicals are not used in the process of growing the food. These chemicals will be present at lower rates in organic foods compared to conventional foods and therefore will not cause as drastic a change when introduced into the water or soil around the area. Less pesticide runoff into surrounding bodies of water keeps the water supply from pollution and unusable, leading to a healthier

references

[1] Lee KS, Choe YC, Park SH. Measuring the environmental effects of organic farming: A meta-analysis of structural variables in empirical research. Journal of Environmental Management, 2015:162, 263-274.

[2] Hansen B, Alrøe HF, Kristensen ES. Approaches to assess the environmental impact of organic farming with particular regard to Denmark. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 2001:83(1-2), 11-26.

[3] Widdicombe, L. [Online] The End of Food. 12 May 2014 [cited 26 Feb 2016]; Available from: URL:http://www.newyorker.com/ magazine/2014/05/12/the-end-of-food [4] Dunn, C. [Online] Organic Food: Healthier for You and the Planet. 2007 Sept 13 [cited 2016 February 25]; Available from: URL:http://www.treehugger.com/green-food/organic-foodhealthier-for-you-and-the-planet/page4.html

“

“

functioning ecosystem.

The earth deserves to have the best treatment humans can give it. Day after day climate change is becoming more prominent due to pollution because of our exploitation of the earth’s resources.

Transitioning to organic foods will help maintain, and even improve the current quality of life. Even though some concerns against eating organic may arise, we have the responsibility of choosing what will be best for future generations.

The concept of eating organic is no longer simply just for nutritional benefits.

11

psychology

SCIENCE TO BE WHAT DO WE REALLY FEEL WHEN WE WATCH SUSPENSE? by brenna wylder

Y

ou are lost in the woods. An unseen creature follows you, just out of sight. You’ve never seen her, or him, or it – all you know is that you have been trying to escape the trees for days.

Each measure of daylight seems to be shorter than the last; you set up the tent each night with the yawning stretch of darkness before you promising only more fear and terror. And in fact, long past the last vestiges of sun are consumed by the horizon, you wake from a paranoid sleep with something pounding and screaming against your tent. You scream, too.

None of this is real. You’re nestled deep in your couch cushions, watching a movie – The Blair Witch Project. The feelings of fear and dread, however, are all too real, and enough to make our bodies tense, our hands sweat, and our hearts race. But what makes this feeling attractive enough to sustain one of the most profitable movie genres? What is it about being scared that so many people find enticing?

For years, the answer to this question has been found in a type of teachable morality; lessons about the virtues of abstinence, the dangers of bullying, and the consequences of lying are clearly discernable within the horror genre’s demonstration of cause and effect.

The teenagers having sex in the woods?

Usually the very first to die. A child’s death at the hand of bullies? Count on this victim resurfacing with a new knack for murder. They teach us that characters with the purest of actions and intentions are the most likely to emerge from the woods. This, some claim, is the draw of

12

horror movies. They offer the comfort of knowing that bad things will happen to bad people, and good things will come to those who remain good.

But for all of the simplicity of this theory, it does not hold up under closer inspection. First, there is no innate, homogenous system of morals. For example, those who support or have no opinion on premarital sex would not be be self-affirmed by the aforementioned teenagers’ demise. It would be a testament to the audience’s self-loathing if the main draw of horror movies was that they glorified the murder of people with whom they identify. Further weakening this theory is the fact that the main demographic for horror movies is teenagers and young adults, who are more likely to engage in the high-risk behaviors and cruelty that horror movies vilify [1].

What seems more likely, and what many experts agree, is that people enjoy the horror genre for the thrill. When it comes to experiencing fear, young adults are “more likely to look for tense experiences.” [1] In fact, a 1995 study found that those who “scored high on a scale that measures sensation-seeking” were more likely to “[like] horror films” [1]. As age generally affects desire for excitement and sensation, it should come as no surprise that young adults are horror movies’ most avid fans. Viewers know they are safely separate from the events of movie, but their brains react anyway; fear is a defense response, and even if you are intentionally subjecting yourself to scares, your brain will treat the threat as real.

SCARED ABOUT The study of neuroscience and hormonal reactions to fear demonstrates exactly what the brain’s response to fear entails. According to Joseph LeDoux, a neuroscientist who specializes in this subject, the primary method for testing fear response is through the Pavlovian method, where a certain image is presented in conjunction with an electric shock [2, 3]. Soon, the image provokes a reaction in the amygdala even without the electric shock. It is through this stimulation that the response to fear is discernable: “The basic neural pathways underlying fear… involve transmission of sensory stimuli... to the amygdala

“

“

qualities: “The adrenal gland dumps cortisol and adrenaline into the bloodstream. Blood pressure surges and the heart races, delivering oxygen and energy to the muscles. It’s the biological equivalent of opening the throttle of an engine” [4].

Whether you see a monster portrayed on screen or you are face to face with it yourself, your body has the same system of defense. The rush of adrenaline and cortisol invigorates your body and heightens your senses. Everything feels sharper.

To some, this is stressful and overwhelming; to

The rush of adrenaline and cortisol invigorates your body and heightens your senses. Everything feels sharper. To some, this is stressful and overwhelming; to others, it is addictive.

from the thalamus and cortex and the control of emotional responses by outputs of the amygdala” [3]. Simplified, the amygdala processes the stimuli and then controls the “expression of defense responses, including behavioral, autonomic nervous system (ANS), and hormonal (hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis) responses.” The particular hormones released in this response are known for their energizing

others, it is addictive.

That said, personal tastes and preferences are highly individualized. To say that there is only one reason for this desire to be scared would be to oversimplify a complex matter. But undeniably, what is deeply entrenched in this particular preference is the desire to feel, even if it’s bloody, even if – as it happens with The Blair Witch Project – no one makes it out alive.

references

1. Why Our Brains Love Horror Movies [Internet]. The

3. LeDoux J. Fear and the brain: where have we been,

Daily Beast. 2011 [cited 24 March 2016]. Available from:

and where are we going?. Biological Psychiatry.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/10/25/

1998;44(12):1229-1238.

why-our-brains-love-horror-movies-fear-catharsis-a-

4. Wise J. When Fear Makes Us Superhuman [Internet].

sense-of-doom.html

Scientific American. 2016 [cited 24 March 2016]. Avail-

2. LeDoux J. Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology.

able from: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/

2003;23(4/5):727-738.

extreme-fear-superhuman/

THE TRIPLE HELIX SPRING 2016 13

physical science

making

WAVES n February 11, 2016, scientists at Laser Interferometer G r a v i t a t i o n a l -Wa v e Observatory (LIGO) announced the first detection of gravitational waves in scientific history, a monumental discovery that proves nearly a century of theory. Einstein’s general theory of relativity predicted their existence in 1917, but the instrumentation needed to prove his theory was not developed until recent years. In this article, we will explore the physics that underlies our understanding of gravitational waves and the LIGO experiment, as well as discuss the possible applications and its impact on the scientific community as a whole.

MECHANICS OF WAVES The discovery of gravitational waves has been an exciting milestone in the scientific community.

Whether a scientist or just a fan of science, it is fundamental to have an understanding of the physical features of waves in order to realize why this is such a headlining discovery. To begin, we start with Sir Isaac Newton, the father of the physical description of the world around us. From his studies came the field of mechanics, which describes the world on a larger and visible, or macro, scale.

The mechanical

14

understanding of a wave is that of an oscillation. A wave must move through a medium, such as water, string, or air.

We see waves in the ocean, in slinkies, and in any object that we move in an oscillating fashion. But what is waving in these cases? We don’t quite know at this point. Creating a wave on the macro scale is a physical act that we impose on an object. External

“

a monumental discovery that proves nearly a century of theory

“

O

the impact of discovering gravitational waves by rachael klaiss and sara lopez

forces, such as damping and gravity, can change the rate of the oscillation or ultimately bring the oscillation to an end.

MAXWELL’S EQUATIONS As the physical understanding of waves translates from mechanics to electricity and magnetism, we start to learn more about what is waving. Waves occur with oscillating electric and magnetic fields; we

call these electromagnetic waves.

In 1873, James Clerk Maxwell, a Scottish scientist and mathematician, published A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, where he presented his four differential equations. These equations are known as Maxwell’s Equations, and they comprehensively describe all of electromagnetism, the interaction of electric and magnetic fields [1,2]. These four equations set the rules for electromagnetism and ultimately lead us to waves [3].

When we interpret and visualize Maxwell’s Equations, we note that electromagnetic waves indeed have “surfaces.”

By understanding electromagnetic waves, we can visualize the invisible. Specifically, only the range of electromagnetic waves with wavelengths 400nm to 700nm is visible light! All other wavelengths are invisible light; this includes microwaves, infrared waves, ultraviolet waves, gamma waves, and radio waves. Towards the turn of the 19th century, it is Maxwell’s contributions to electromagnetism that paved the way for the next great scientist, Albert Einstein.

Perhaps the most prominent physicist of all time is Albert Einstein.

His famous equation, E=mc2, relates energy to the mass of a particle and the speed of light. This follows from his theory of special relativity, which describes how objects act when moving at velocities that are large fractions of the speed of light.

Consider the speed of light as a sort of cosmic speed limit -- nothing can have a higher velocity than the speed of light (c=3 x 10^8 m/s, or about 186,282 miles per second). When objects or particles begin to move at velocities near the speed of light, we observe effects of time dilation, length contractions, and differences in energy [3]. This is where the relation of energy, mass, and speed comes into play: E=mc^2 is called an object’s relativistic energy.

Einstein’s theory of general relativity combines special relativity and Newton’s description of gravity.

However, Newtonian mechanics do not account for gravity at relativistic limits, which is necessary for a deeper understanding of spacetime. At its essence, general relativity describes “the cur vature o f

“

matter tells space how to curve, and space tells matter how to move.

“

EINSTEIN’S THEORY OF RELATIVITY

spacetime as directly related to the energy and momentum of whatever matter and radiation are present” [4].

In other words, “Matter tells space how to curve, and space tells matter how to move” [5]. General relativity describes distortions in space and time. Soon Einstein realized that the mathematical limits of his theory predict black holes and gravitational waves.

DETECTION OF GRAVITATIONAL WAVES Before scientists were able to test Einstein’s theory, they first needed to theorize our understanding of black holes, as they are the only astrophysical objects powerful enough to produce gravitational waves of magnitudes that we are capable of detecting.

This was only possible after Karl Schwarzschild, German physicist and

astronomer, released his solutions to Einstein’s field equations in 1916.

Schwarzschild’s solutions enabled scientists to accurately model black hole mergers and their gravitational waveforms [6]. A binary black hole system is essentially two black holes on a crash-course, orbiting each other at incredible speeds until the two black holes merge, called “the final black hole ringdown” [6]. This rare, astronomical event created gravitational waves powerful enough to travel the 401 megaparsecs (1021 miles!) to Earth and into LIGO’s instrumentation [6].

LIGO has twin Michelson interferometers in Louisiana and Washington, not unlike the lab instrumentation housed in LeConte Hall for Berkeley students in the introductory optics course. Physicists can detect gravitational waves using a laser to make extremely precise measurements of length. A laser is directed at a beam-splitter, which then splits the laser into two beams that are perfectly in phase with each other. The beams travel the length of each orthogonal leg of the Michelson interferometer. If a gravitational wave stretches or contracts the space inside one of the legs, the laser will travel an extra fraction of a wavelength than usual. Since each orthogonal

PHOTO OF LIGO LABRATORY

THE TRIPLE HELIX SPRING 2016 15

physical science

“

“

Scientists will confidently use these tiny disturbances in space and time to detect other massive and energetic phenomena in space. leg measures 4 kilometers in length, a stretch in space of a fraction of a wavelength of light can only be detected using interferometry [7].

The laser will then be reflected off each mirror at the end of the leg, and if the two split beams don’t return in phase, we know one must have traveled a longer distance than the other.

On September 14, 2015, at 5:15 am EST, this is just what LIGO achieved. A cataclysmic merging of two stellar-mass black holes, measuring 29 and 36 times the mass of the sun, released a burst of energy in accordance to Einstein’s E=mc2.

Part of this energy was converted into gravitational waves, about 3 solar masses in a fraction of a second, and the total power output is said

[1] The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) [Internet]. Web.mit.edu. 2016 [cited 21 March 2016]. Available from: http://web.mit.edu/8.02t/ www/materials/StudyGuide/guide13.pdf [2] Molecular Expressions Microscopy Primer: Light and Color - Electromagnetic Radiation: Interactive Tutorial [Internet]. Micro.magnet.fsu. edu. 2016 [cited 17 March 2016]. Available from: https://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/electromagnetic/index.html [3] Griffiths D. Introduction to electrodynamics. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall; 1999.

[4] General relativity [Internet]. Www-history.mcs. st-and.ac.uk. 2016 [cited 17 March 2016]. Available from: http://www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/Hist-

16

to be 50 times that of the entire universe. Although these black holes merged 1.3 billion years ago, their gravitational waves were only just now detected by the twin Michelson interferometers, first in Livingston, Louisiana, then confirmed seconds later in Hanford, Washington [8].

WAVING HELLO TO THE FUTURE Not only was LIGO’s discovery the first detection of gravitational waves, it was also the first direct detection of a binary black hole system. These results open an entirely new world in astrophysics; tomorrow’s scientists will confidently use these tiny disturbances in space and time to detect other massive and energetic phenomena in space. Gravitational waves will have profound implications in the physical and cosmological world, but their everyday applications are not yet

references

Topics/General_relativity.html [5] WMAP Big Bang Theory [Internet]. Map.gsfc. nasa.gov. 2016 [cited 21 March 2016]. Available from: http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/bb_theory.html [6] Abott B. P. et al. Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger. Phys Rev Lett. 2016;116(6).

[7] LIGO Lab | Caltech | MIT [Internet]. LIGO Lab | Caltech. 2016 [cited 21 March 2016]. Available from: https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/ [8] Gravitational waves detected 100 years after Einstein’s prediction | NSF - National Science Foundation [Internet]. Nsf.gov. 2016 [cited 17 March 2016]. Available from: http://www.nsf.gov/news/

clear. What is clear, however, is that this would not have been possible without the funding from the National Science Foundation and other private donors who have given to this experiment, not knowing if it would ever be a success. It is key to encourage the public world to explore their scientific interests in order to continue impacting and contributing to the scientific world. The detection of gravitational waves is a milestone in physics that should accelerate our understanding of the universe, one that will call for the next generation of scientists to prepare themselves for this exciting new field.

news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=137628 [9] Overbye D. Gravitational Waves Detected, Confirming Einstein’s Theory [Internet]. Nytimes. com. 2016 [cited 21 March 2016]. Available from: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/12/science/ ligo-gravitational-waves-black-holes-einstein. html?_r=0 [10] We’ve Detected Gravitational Waves, So What? : DNews [Internet]. DNews. 2016 [cited 21 March 2016]. Available from: http://news.discovery.com/space/weve-detected-gravitational-waves-so-what-160213.htm [11] Cover Photo Source: Popular Science Magazine, Background Photos: LIGO Labratory

thinning out

TRENDS DIET scientists attempt to find the healthiest diet by patrick lee

SKINNYon HISTORY DIETS THROUGH THE AGES

Vinegar and Water Diet. Popularized by poet Lord Byron.

1820

negative consequences on cardiovascular health [5]. We now face the challenge of reconciling these findings from the carb versus fat debate with the underlying nutritional principles behind all of the countless existing diets, aptly named vegan, paleo, low-fat, high-fat, low-carb, high-carb, etc.

How may we settle this food fight? Or better yet, can we?

Thankfully, yes, but we need to start by reviewing the reactions of the scientific community to these findings.

The academic response to the March 2014 study, led by Dr. Rajiv Chowdhury, MD, PhD, in the effects of dietary fats on cardiovascular health, was universally negative. Dr. Walter Willett, chair of the nutrition department at the Harvard School of Public Health, urged for the paper’s retraction because the study failed to mention “what replaced saturated fat [in the study] if someone reduces the amount of saturated fat in their diet” [5], alluding to the established fact that the risk of heart disease is lowered if saturated fats are replaced with unsaturated fats from nuts, and unchanged if saturated fats were replaced with refined sugars and starches [5]. Other critics charged that the study excluded “[other] important studies on omega-6 fatty acids” [6] that would have conflicted with

and “inaccurate even dangerous

dietary advice leads to the many fad foods and diets consumers see on magazine tabloids, internet advertisements, and Facebook

The Chewing Movement.

Horace Fletcher advocated chewing every mouthful of food until liquid before swallowing to promote digestion.

Late 1800’s

1550

1830s

Luigi Cornaro’s The Sure and Certain Method of Attaining a Long and Healthful Life calls for restricting one’s daily food intake to 350 grams (about the mass of a small chicken egg).

Impressively, he lived to the age of 98.

The Raw Food Diet.

Sylvester Graham lays the earliest principles in response to a cholera epidemic.

The Tapeworm Diet. Ingest a tapeworm by tablet and let it absorb calories from food consumed.

1920s

1918

“

T

oday’s rising prevalence of obesity and heart disease is matched by an ever-growing consumerism for health science and news.

The weight-loss industry, which includes special foods, diet programs, and surgeries, remains one of the most profitable markets in the United States, valued at about $60 billion in 2014 [1].

America’s efforts to curb obesity and heart disease, the two leading diet-related diseases, have arguably caused more confusion and frustration than good. The last decades sprouted ill-informed fads about various “health foods and alternatives” including breakfast cereal, Diet Coke, and celery, and more recently, organic nonfat dairy and whole wheat products [2]. Some of the most impactful developments in the modern “carb versus fat” debate were two major studies published in 2014 by the Annals of Internal Medicine: one in March concluded that “...current evidence does not clearly support cardiovascular guidelines that encourage high consumption of polyunsaturated fatty acids and low consumption of total saturated fats” [3], while the other in September stated that “...a lowcarbohydrate diet was more effective for weight loss and cardiovascular risk factor reduction than the low-fat [diet]” [4]. This prompted countless media outlets to proclaim that avoiding highcarbohydrate foods like bread and rice would result in weight loss while raising consumption of high-fat foods like meat and butter would have no

The Grapefruit Diet.

Eat a grapefruit with every meal to lose weight. Took celebrities by storm.

1930s

1925

Diet and Health: With Key to Cigarettes advertised Calories is published. Dr. Lulu as weight-loss aids Hunt Peters introduces the notion because nicotine of counting calories to measure suppressed appetite. weight loss and forever changed how people evaluate nutrition.

THE TRIPLE HELIX SPRING 2016 17

health

“

the paper’s claims that consuming polyunsaturated fats yielded no benefits to cardiovascular disease. The Annals of Internal Medicine subsequently released a statement that apologized for the various inaccuracies of the March 2014 study and declared “the conclusions…are seriously misleading and should be disregarded” [5].

In contrast, the September 2014 study in comparing weight loss results from a low-carb diet with those from a low-fat diet was positively received in academic circles.

Various other studies have corroborated its findings, such as two that demonstrated that a lowcarb diet was more effective in leading to weight loss and treating obesity than a low-fat diet was [7,8]. This is not surprising, as “refined starches and sugars… are the largest sources of calories in the U.S. diet” [5] and these are processed (more on this later), and high consumption of these have demonstrably harmful effects [9]. Nevertheless, as the study itself warned, one must not be misled (by media sensationalism, for example) to believe that these findings conclusively settle the fat vs. carb debate since there was still a lack of follow-up research in how these diets affect health in the long

there is a universal consensus that the optimal diet is to “eat more plants, less sugar and fewer processed foods”

“

The Sleeping Beauty Diet.

Dieters are heavily sedated to be bedridden for days, losing weight by not eating. Reportedly practiced by Elvis Presley.

1970s

18

term [4].

A closer review of these studies not only reveals that they were far less impactful than they sounded, but also illustrates two recurring problems in the communication of scientific research to the general public. It is an unfortunate reality that poorly designed studies are occasionally published in even the most reputable science journals.

Worse, even established scientific findings from proper research and rigorous review are often misunderstood and exaggerated by the media, leading to inaccurate and even dangerous dietary advice-leading to the many fad foods and diets consumers see on magazine tabloids, internet advertisements, and Facebook.

The best practice to avoid being misinformed about diet advice and health news is to seek consistent, established expert opinions about diet and health as opposed to isolated research studies and findings. To begin with, it is a myth that nutrition experts are heavily divided; Dr. David Katz, M.D. reasons that there is a universal consensus that the optimal diet is to “eat more plants, less sugar and fewer processed foods” [10]. The 20152020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services concur, with an extra word of caution against exorbitant portions and sodium and fat intake [11].

Even nutritional science research

Dexatrim supplements.

A weight-loss drug containing phenylpropanolamine, which was later banned in 2000 by the FDA for increasing risk of stroke.

1979

studies cited by books, blogs, and braggarts to support conflicting dietary advices fundamentally assume this common ground. The reality is that most purported discrepancies in scientific findings are actually based off of inaccurate press releases that misrepresent scientific findings [12].

According to Dr. Michael Pollan, ultimately, the healthiest diet is of minimally processed food, not too much food, and mostly plant-based food [13].

It is really that straightforward and intuitive. Any credible dietary recommendation from the scientific community and the media and even the philosophies behind the different popular diets today would trace back to this statement. Pollan theorizes “[The] food industry, nutritional science, and journalism” [14] are responsible for complicating this by singling out individual nutrients (e.g. fat, cholesterol, omega 3s, carbs, etc.) and exaggerating their effects on one’s health [14]. It is no coincidence that packaged goods in supermarket shelves, despite the vast variety of brands, flavors, and prices, often boast a “low ____” label prominently on their containers.

Now that the “secret” of the healthiest diet is out, how does this look in practice?

Let’s start with the kinds of foods to consume: eat more that are minimally processed and fewer that are processed (preserved

The Hallelujah Diet.

Based on what Adam and Eve from the Bible would have eaten.

1990s

1976

1982

2011

The Master Cleanse. A concoction of lemon water, maple syrup, and cayenne pepper purportedly rids the body of metabolic toxins. Famously practiced by Beyoncé Knowles.

Aerobics workouts craze.

Popularized by exercise videos produced by actress Jane Fonda, who coined “No pain, no gain.”

The HCG Diet. Restrict caloric intake to 500 calories and take fertility steroids daily.

PRESENT

Labels galore. GMO, organic, omega-3 fatty acids, olive oil, low-fat dairy, whole wheat, etc.

However, the health benefits of many modern eating trends are far less established in scientific literature than what the general public is led to believe.

meats and the aforementioned refined starches and sugars). Unprocessed applies to not just produce or meats but also dairy products, which were never to be feared. Full-fat dairy products like whole milk and yogurt were been vilified in the past for their high fat content, but this was due to a failure to discern just how qualitatively different the dietary saturated fats in dairy products are from those in baked goods and processed food (it is this same line of reasoning that consuming avocados and nuts is widely recommended despite their high fat content). In fact, whole dairy products have been demonstrated to promote

achieving a healthy weight because the high fat content leaves one satiated and likely to eat less [15, 16].

Next is variety. Nutritional needs are more easily met when one consumes a greater variety of foods. Of course, this could be a challenge for those with dietary restrictions due to personal health conditions or by choice. Nevertheless, even vegans or vegetarians can take solace in the fact that study after study has shown that these special diets can be just as healthful as omnivorous diets [17, 18].

Finally, emphasis on moderation.

Drinking whole milk is less likely

to lead to healthy weight loss if one ignores its satiating effects and overeats.

Consuming more of a single nutrientrich food may not contribute to health, and can even do just the opposite. For example, cauliflower, broccoli, and kale can cause hypothyroidism and other health complications if eaten in mass quantities (e.g. a smoothie daily) [19].

No matter how different your diet may look from a friend’s, as long as it fulfills these three criteria it forms the cornerstone of any healthy diet. Get your shopping lists ready!

references [1] Marketdata Enterprises Inc. The U.S. Weight

[7] Yancy W, Olsen M, Guyton J, Bakst R, Westman E.

able

Loss Market: 2015 Status Report & Forecast [Inter-

A low-carbohydrate, ketogenic diet versus a low-fat

magazine/28nutritionism.t.html?_r=0

net]. Tampa, FL: Marketdata; 2015. Available from:

diet to treat obesity and hyperlipidemia. ACC Current

https://www.bharatbook.com/healthcare-market-re-

Journal Review. 2004;13(8):18-19.

between high-fat dairy consumption and obesity, car-

search-reports-467678/healthcare-industry-health-

[8] Foster G, Wyatt H, Hill J, Makris A, Rosenbaum D,

diovascular, and metabolic disease. European Jour-

care-market-research-reports-healthcare-indus-

Brill C et al. Weight and Metabolic Outcomes After 2

nal of Nutrition. 2012;52(1):1-24.

try-analysis-healthcare-sector1.html

Years on a Low-Carbohydrate Versus Low-Fat Diet.

[16] Pereira M, Jacobs D, Van Horn L, Slattery M, Kar-

[2] Borsari K. 30 Years of Fad Diets and Food Trends

Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey. 2010;65(12):769-

tashov A, Ludwig D. Dairy Consumption, Obesity, and

[Internet]. Shape Magazine. 2016 [cited 22 March

770.

the Insulin Resistance Syndrome in Young Adults.

2016]. Available from: http://www.shape.com/blogs/

[9] Yang Q, Zhang Z, Gregg E, Flanders W, Merritt R,

JAMA. 2002;287(16):2081-2089.

fit-foodies/30-years-fad-diets-and-food-trends

Hu F. Added Sugar Intake and Cardiovascular Diseas-

[17] Position of the American Dietetic Association:

[3] Chowdhury R, Warnakula S, Kunutsor S, Crowe F,

es Mortality Among US Adults. JAMA Internal Medi-

Vegetarian Diets. Journal of the American Dietetic

Ward H, Johnson L et al. Association of Dietary, Cir-

cine. 2014;174(4):516-524.

Association. 2009;109(7):1266-1282.

culating, and Supplement Fatty Acids With Coronary

[10] Katz D. Why ‘No Two Nutritionists Agree’ is a

[18] Sanders T. The nutritional adequacy of plant-

Risk. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2014;160(6):398-

Myth [Internet]. US News & World Report. 2015 [cit-

based diets. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society.

406.

ed 22 March 2016]. Available from: http://health.us-

1999;58(02):265-269.

[4] Bazzano L, Hu T, Reynolds K, Yao L, Bunol C, Liu Y

news.com/health-news/blogs/eat-run/2015/04/27/

[19] Barry T, Duncan S, Sadler W, Millar K, Sheppard

et al. Effects of Low-Carbohydrate and Low-Fat Diets.

why-no-two-nutritionists-agree-is-a-myth?utm_

A. Iodine metabolism and thyroid hormone relation-

Annals of Internal Medicine. 2014;161(5):309-318.

source=huffingtonpost.com&utm_medium=refer-

ships in growing sheep fed on kale (Brassica olera-

[5] Phares E. Dietary fat and heart disease study is

ral&utm_campaign=pubexchange_article

cea) and ryegrass (Lolium perenne)–clover (Trifoli-

seriously misleading | The Nutrition Source | Harvard

[11] U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

um repens) fresh-forage diets. BJN. 1983;49(02):241.

T.H. Chan School of Public Health [Internet]. Hsph.

and U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2015 - 2020 Di-

[20] Rotchford L. Diets through history: The good,

harvard.edu. 2014 [cited 22 March 2016]. Available

etary Guidelines for Americans [Internet]. 2015. Avail-

the bad and the scary [Internet]. CNN. 2013 [cit-

from:

able from: http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/

ed 16 April 2016]. Available from: http://www.cnn.

source/2014/03/19/dietary-fat-and-heart-disease-

guidelines/

com/2013/02/08/health/diets-through-history/

study-is-seriously-misleading/

[12] Sumner P, Vivian-Griffiths S, Boivin J, Williams A,

[21] The 11 weirdest fad diets in history [Internet].

[6] Kupferschmidt K. Scientists Fix Errors in Contro-

Venetis C, Davies A et al. The association between

Telegraph.co.uk. [cited 16 April 2016]. Available from:

versial Paper About Saturated Fats [Internet]. Sci-

exaggeration in health related science news and ac-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/healthy-

encemag.org. 2014 [cited 22 March 2016]. Available

ademic press releases: retrospective observational

eating/10563419/The-10-weirdest-fad-diets-in-histo-

from:

study. BMJ. 2014;349(dec09 7):g7015-g7015.

ry.html?frame=3136553

scientists-fix-errors-controversial-paper-about-sat-

[13] Katz D, Meller S. Can We Say What Diet Is Best for

[22] Timeline [Internet]. Sirc.org. 2016 [cited 16 April

urated-fats?utm_content=buffer648ea&utm_medi-

Health?. Annu Rev Public Health. 2014;35(1):83-103.

2016]. Available from: http://www.sirc.org/timeline/

um=social&utm_source=linkedin.com&utm_cam-

[14] Pollan M. Unhappy Meals - Michael Pollan [Inter-

timeline.shtml

paign=buffer

net]. Nytimes.com. 2007 [cited 22 March 2016]. Avail-

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutrition-

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2014/03/

from:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/

[15] Kratz M, Baars T, Guyenet S. The relationship

THE TRIPLE HELIX SPRING 2016 19

green ALWAYS clean

environment

isn’t

E

“

Residents near the production plants describe officials driving from the plant and dumping white liquid all over the ground, rendering it toxic and infertile, and driving away.

“

20

the environmental cost of solar energy by maria krasilnikov

verywhere you look in the Bay Area, people seem to be hopping on board the green train for a better environmental future. It’s not uncommon to see four Prii lined up behind one another at a stop sign, each a different pastel shade and working towards a lower monthly gas cost and a greener future. Schools, businesses and individual families have also started opting to obtain energy in a more environmentally efficient way with the use of solar panels.

While it’s true that the way these shiny black roof decorations obtain energy is much better for the planet than burning fossil fuels, they might not actually be as green as some people claim.

First emerging at the turn of the century, solar panels have become increasingly popular and more efficient with the years. Solar technology has become one of the leading power sources in the world, with an average growth rate of 50% per year for the past six years [1]. Some experts even hope that by 2050, nearly 30% of the world’s energy will come directly from solar [1]. The benefits of solar seem endless; they obtain energy from the sun and convert it into electrical power for whatever unit they’re connected to, essentially giving that particular building or object endless power since the sun doesn’t run out of energy. In fact, they produce so much energy that some energy corporations like Pacific Gas and Electric, will even pay homeowners with solar panels for the excess energy they obtain [2].

Currently, these panels are most popular in areas with the most sunlight, where the cost of installation would balance with the massive amounts of energy obtained. These areas include California

in the United States as well as Germany in Europe [1].

However, solar panel production doesn’t have such a rosy outlook.

Currently, and unsurprisingly, the majority of solar panels exported throughout the world are being made in industrial villages in China. As demand for solar panels has increased, these cities are being faced with the problem of producing more panels with a continuously decreasing price [3, 4].

While this is great for the consumers around the world, citizens of China that live near these production plants are faced with a much harsher reality.

These plants are producing polysilicon, a major component of solar cells, and are releasing more pollutants into China’s already unclean air [3, 5]. Polysilicon isn’t the real threat; its byproduct, silicon tetrachloride, is a highly toxic substance that poses extreme environmental hazards [5]. Additionally, to cut the costs of production, some companies are actually ignoring governmental environmental regulations and dumping the toxic waste from production into the nearby waterways [3, 5]. Residents near the production plants describe officials driving from the plant and dumping white liquid all over the ground, rendering it toxic and infertile, and driving away [5].

As a result, toxins from solar cell plants are being found in irrigation systems of nearby Chinese farmers and villagers [3, 5]. While these solar panels are helping to reduce the use of fossil fuels when they are already made, their production is increasing the airborne and waterborne pollutants in China. Officials in China claim that they will clean up this waste with more regulations on production

THE

UNSPOKEN ISSUE

CARBON DIOXIDE HEXAFLUOROETHANE

12,000 TIMES

NITROGEN TRIFLUORIDE

toxicities of chemicals produced by solar cell manufacturing, relative to carbon dioxide

17,000 TIMES

SULFUR HEXAFLUORIDE

ENVIRONMENTAL THREAT RELATIVE TO CARBON DIOXIDE

companies and commence clean up efforts once the demand for solar has gone down [3, 5]. However, with the increased need for solar in the past decade, it’s unclear when or if the clean up will actually start.

Solar panel production in China also raises an issue of socioeconomic privilege.

Currently, the demand for solar is most common in upper middle class areas, with some exceptions, while those most affected by the pollution of the production are lower class Chinese farmers. One farmer, Qiao Shi Peng, describes the current situation in China by saying, “It’s poison air. Sometimes it gets so bad you can’t sit outside. You have to close all the doors and windows” [5]. The wealthy are able to live in a clean environment in which they believe they’re helping the world’s greenhouse gas emissions by using solar panels. Their counterparts in China are fully aware of how much solar production contributes to the destruction of the environment since solar panels are directly destroying their wellbeing. The natural question to ask is, “can we do anything?”

In response to the unfair production and use of solar panels, the answer is yes; we can do something to change how these “ecofriendly” cells are made. The first step is awareness, most people are simply not aware of the fact that solar panels could potentially be harmful to the environment if they’re marketed as the greenest invention on Earth. While the technology may not currently exist to change the production of solar cells, those with information about the harmful production can petition to change government regulations about the purchase of these panels [4]. It is possible to urge our government to only allow import of solar panels from companies that follow China’s environmental regulations, or individuals can choose to purchase panels from domestic producers [4]. This decision may cause an increase in price for the consumer, but it will allow solar panels to truly be “green”.

“

It’s poison air.

Sometimes it gets so bad you can’t sit outside.

You have to close all the doors and windows.

“

SOURCE: AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE

23,000 TIMES

references [1] Pinner D, Rogers M. Solar Power Comes of Age.

stitute; 2013 [cited 2016Mar2]. Retrieved from: http://

(cover story). Foreign Affairs [serial on the Internet].

www.worldwatch.org/node/5650

(2015, Mar), [cited March 2, 2016]; 94(2): 111-118.

[4] Mulvaney D. Solar’s green dilemma. IEEE Spectrum

Available from: Business Source Complete.

[serial on the Internet]. (2014, Sep 1), [cited March 2,

[2] PG&E Incentives for Clean Energy [Internet]. PG&E

2016]; 51(9): 30-33. Available from: Inspec.

Incentives for Clean Energy. [cited 2016Mar2]. Re-

[5] Eunjung Cha A. Solar Energy Firms Leave Waste

trieved

Behind in China. The Washington Post [Internet].

from:

https://www.pge.com/en/myhome/

saveenergymoney/solar/qualify.page

2008Mar9 [cited 2016Mar2]; Retrieved from: http://

[3] Liu Y. The Dirty Side of a “Green” Industry [Internet].

www.highbeam.com/doc/1p2-15475435.html?re-

The Dirty Side of a “Green” Industry. Worldwatch In-

fid=easy_hf

THE TRIPLE HELIX SPRING 2016 21

new frontiers the groundbreaking implications of gene editing

T

he biomedical revolution at the start of the twenty-first century thrust once-whimsical science fiction stories into reality. In 1996, the birth of Dolly the sheep, the first mammal successfully created from a test tube, began a discussion about the realistic potential for human cloning [1]. A rise in stem cell research over the last two decades has advanced the capabilities of regenerative medicine [2]. More recently, a new technique termed CRISPR/Cas9 has accelerated the conversation about another former science fiction fantasy – the ability to edit our genome.

Everything that makes up who you are is encoded in your genome, a collection of your entire DNA, which is divided up into sections known as genes.

Each of these genes is composed of a long DNA sequence “code” that gives rise to a unique function in your body.

Some of these genes and their associated functions are related to diseases or defects – these parts of your genome are what scientists hope to target and manipulate with CRISPR/Cas9. CRISPR and Cas make up a two-part system with the ultimate objective of creating a loss-offunction or change-of-function mutation in a targeted gene [3].

The potential of the CRISPR/ Cas9 system was first discovered in 2012 by French biologist Emmanuelle Charpentier and UC Berkeley’s own Jennifer Doudna [4]. CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats) contains a guide RNA sequence, known as gRNA, whose function is to identify a specific, programmable sequence of DNA. The gRNA latches on and scales a genome in search of a particular DNA sequence.

The sequence that CRISPR targets can be chosen at will, which makes the CRISPR/Cas9 system easily adaptable

22

by monica cassandras

for biologists to focus on any gene of interest.

Cas (CRISPR-associated genes), and specifically Cas9, an enzyme from Streptococcus pyogenes (a species of bacteria that is rare but pathogenic in humans), has the ability to form physical breaks in double-stranded DNA and cut out certain sections of the DNA code. When the two are paired to make CRISPR/Cas9, as achieved by Doudna and Charpentier, the system can essentially locate a chosen target gene (with CRSIPR) and destroy it (with Cas9) [3]. This unique ability has led Doudna to describe CRISPR/Cas9 as a biological “swiss army knife” [4].

With the ability to find and alter genes, Cas9 can be modified to knock out or edit a gene, add or delete large genome sequences, modify multiple genes at once, or increase expression of a gene [5].

Due to its high efficiency and easy adaptability, the technique has already replaced other genome editing mechanisms and has become the focus of much biomedical research, with the hope of curing genetic defects and eliminating diseases. Using CRISPR/Cas9 only requires the redesign of CRISPR’s gRNA to target a distinct genome sequence, so it is easy to manipulate and can be used to edit the genome of practically any creature [6]. This has led to rapid and diverse progress in CRISPR/Cas9 research.

Since its discovery only four years ago, CRISPR/ Cas9 has already been successfully implemented to target genes in humans, monkeys, fish, bacteria, and plants – to name only a few [6].

Studies to date have resulted in genome

editing with high fidelity – without many errors – and minimal cell death [7].

In mice, CRISPR/Cas9 has already been used to prevent Huntington’s disease and Duchenne muscular dystrophy by editing of the genes that lead to these diseases [4].

In humans, there is potential to use the technique to cure cancer, enhance organ transplants, and ultimately cure any genetically encoded disease [8].

George Church at Harvard Medical School is currently using CRISPR/Cas9 to address the shortage of organs available for transplants. By using CRISPR/Cas9 to cut out harmful genes in mammalian tissue, he hopes to make the organs of other mammals viable for transplants into humans. As of October 2015, Church had already modified 60 genes in pigs in order to destroy DNA that would

be viral in humans. He hopes to perform transplants of these pig organs into monkeys this year, and clinical trials in humans within the next few years [4]. CRISPR/Cas9 is also being used to develop new therapies for human oncology efforts, such as the modeling of colorectal cancer and genome-wide screening [9]. Chinese researchers also claim to have successfully modified human embryos to cure beta thalassemia, a blood disorder [4].

However, with revolutionary biotechnology also comes concern over potential ethical and biomedical consequences. Doudna acknowledges that “there’s always the risk of something going rogue” with gene editing, emphasizing the need for international conversation and regulation for genome manipulation. There are fears that CRISPR/ Cas9 could be the start of a slippery slope toward someday having unregulated “designer babies,” with parents selecting genes for health, talent, intelligence, or any other trait in their offspring.

Many ethically oppose the genetic manipulation of germ-line cells – cells

that are passed to offspring – on religious or moral grounds.

We already practice a degree of such gene selection, however, through in vitro fertilization (IVF). Parents are currently able to screen themselves and their embryos for genetic diseases, and can choose to implant only healthy embryos during IVF [4]. While designer babies do have the potential to ensure the absence of a particular defect, some worry that the ability to select specific genes may lead society to devalue natural individuality and ostracize those with disabilities or abnormalities. There are also concerns over the lack of equal access to such genetic engineering, as it is expensive and only accessible to a portion of the population. Thus, there are serious social concerns regarding the use of genetic engineering, along with worries about the efficacy of genome editing and potential mistakes by geneticists.

Another critique of CRISPR/ Cas9 is the potential to create a genetic mutation that could spread throughout a population with irreversible consequences. Once a mutation is introduced in a species, whether naturally or through CRISPR/Cas9, the spread of the mutation is difficult to control.

If a certain mutation backfires and is allowed to spread through a population, it could introduce a new genetic disorder

or cause irreversible damage to a population [4]. There is also a fear that the technique could fall into the hands of biohackers, who could use CRISPR/ Cas9 maliciously or recklessly. Because the technique does not require expert knowledge to use and calls for relatively inexpensive materials, there is a potential for use by bioterrorists threatening to use it for biowarfare, genocide, or extinction of another species [4].

Despite these concerns, research and trials with CRISPR/Cas9 are ongoing and continue to show encouraging results toward finding cures for genetically encoded diseases in humans. So, when can we realistically predict to have CRISPR/Cas9 therapies by? Doudna and other CRISPR pioneers have begun a biotechnology startup and plan to use CRISPR/Cas9 in human adults by 2017, beginning with a treatment for a form of blindness. Church expects to test organ transplants from other mammals into humans within the next couple of years [4]. Such adaptability and efficiency make the potential for future therapies and applications appear limitless. As we continue to grapple with biomedical difficulties along with ethical concerns regarding genome editing, it seems this science fiction dream may be close to realization.

references

1. The University of Edinburgh [online]. 2016 [cited 2016

olutionize-biology-2015-10

March 1]; Available from: URL: http://www.roslin.ed.ac.uk/

5. Peng R, Lin G, Li J. Potential pitfalls of CRISPR/Cas9-me-

public-interest/dolly-the-sheep/a-life-of-dolly/

diated Genome Editing. PubMed 2015 November 4.

2. Independent [online]. 2014 October 16 [cited 2016 March 1]; Available from: URL: http://www. independent.co.uk/news/science/top-doctor-hails-biomedical-revolution-9799146. html

6. New England BioLabs [online]. 2016 [cited 2016 March 1]; Available from: URL: https://www.neb.com/tools-and-resources/feature-articles/crispr-cas9-and-targeted-genomeediting-a-new-era-in-molecular-biology 7. Lin S, Staahl BT, Alla RK, Doudna JA. Enhanced homol-

3. Addgene [online]. 2015 [cited 2016 March 1]; Available from: URL: https://www.addgene.org/ crispr/guide/ 4. Business Insider [online].

2015 November 19 [cited 2016 March 1]; Available from: URL: http://www. businessinsider.com/ how-crispr-will-rev-

ogy-directed human genome engineering by controlled timing of CRISPR/Cas9 delivery. PubMed 2014 Dec 15; 3:e04766.

8. Sanchez-Rivera FJ and Jacks T. Applications of the CRISPR-Cas9 system in cancer biology. PubMed 2015 July; 15(7): 387-395.

9. Shi J, Wang E, Milazzo JP, Wang Z, Kinney JB, Vakoc CR. Discovery of cancer drug targets by CRISPR-Cas9 screening of protein domains. Nature biotechnology 2015 May 11; 33(6): 661-667.

THE TRIPLE HELIX SPRING 2016 23

medical

vaccination or

BUST?

the potentialy life saving HPV vaccine has been inciting controversy in the media

R

ecent media coverage has brought the HPV vaccine controversy back into the spotlight. Articles such as “Protect your Daughter from the HPV Vaccine” by Consuella Pachicho have been circulating on social media pages, adding fuel to the fire in the debate about the efficacy and necessity of HPV Vaccines [3].

In March 2016, Norma Erickson uploaded her opinion piece to the SaneVax, Inc webpage, an organization which claims to promote safe, affordable, necessary and effective vaccination practices While it is an [5]. Erickson suggests the HPV Vaccine individual’s right that is both ineffective and to not vaccinate, unsafe, and questions CDC’s medical it is not right the authority [5].

The concern for individuals behind bloggers like without the Pachicho and Erickson proper education influencing the public that they disguise to be influencing isopinion pieces as fact and use emotion to others based appeal to concerned on emotional parents. Instead of experiences. encouraging the public to make fact-driven and evidence-based choices, bloggers like Pachico and Erickson argue that cold and calculated scientists do not care about

“

“

24

by rebecca ocher

individuals and the side effects they may experience. However, a thorough investigation of the HPV vaccine shows a much different truth than Pachico and Erickson present in their blogs.

Gardasil and Cervarix are two vaccines that protect against strains of the Human Papilloma Virus, a disease that can be transmitted through sexual contact, and can lead to cervical cancer and genital warts [2].

Many reputable organizations such as the CDC and American Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecology have made efforts to promote the vaccination that protects specifically against strains of HPV known to cause cervical cancer and genital warts.

The vaccines have proven to be incredibly effective and safe: both vaccines have been found to be nearly 100% effective at preventing infection of two types of cervical cancer (16 and 18), and their side effects have been reported to be minimal [1, 2].

From the beginning of its integration into pediatric preventative care in 2006, Gardasil was a controversial vaccine because it protected against a sexually transmitted disease; critics believed that this would encourage youth to become sexually active at an earlier age, although this has not been proven. Unfortunately,

many inaccurate rumors are precluding both young men and women from getting a vaccine that can improve their long-term health.

One argument against immunization for HPV is that the consequences of infection are trivial. This, unfortunately, could not be further from the truth. Several strains of HPV have been linked to cervical cancer, genital warts, and vaginal and vulvar illnesses. In the US alone, 33 women are diagnosed with cervical cancer every day, totalling about 12,360 per year [1]. Unlike many other forms of cancer, cervical cancers are mostly linked to exposure risk factors such as HPV. In fact, two strains of the virus cause 70% of cervical cancer cases [1,2].

While cervical cancer can be effectively treated if diagnosed early, it is still a significant cause of morbidity in the United States and worldwide. Cervical cancer diagnoses and treatments place a huge strain on the healthcare system and patients, and so many of these diagnoses can be prevented with better preventative care measures like vaccination.

Specifically, the HPV vaccine can significantly reduce the need for biopsies and invasive procedures associated with abnormal cervical screening [2].

There are currently about 200 known strains of HPV. The former version of Gardasil protected against 4 of these strains (6, 11, 16 and 18), which account for 70% of cervical cancer cases and 90% of genital warts cases.

Currently, Gardasil 9 protects against these four strains as well as five others that have been correlated to cervical, vulvar and vaginal diseases (31, 33, 45, 52 and 58). Organizations like the CDC have been encouraging girls as young as nine years old to get the vaccination against the most virulent strains of this virus because many individuals become infected with HPV within the first two to three years of sexual contact [1]. In fact, HPV can be spread through any genital contact, even without intercourse.

Further, HPV is more easily propagated than other sexually transmitted infections because there is currently no way to test males for the virus. Because HPV infection is often asymptomatic, there is no way for males to be certain if they have become infected or if they are carriers of HPV. As such, males can unknowingly spread the virus to their partners. Moreover, most non-cervical HPV cancers are found in men [2]. The CDC estimates that about 90% of men and 80% of sexually active women will become infected with at

least one strain of HPV at some point in their lifetime, highlighting the need to protect both boys and girls against the virulent strains of HPV before they become sexually active [2].

Currently the CDC recommends routine vaccination for both boys and girls at ages 11 or 12 [1]. Gardasil is administered in a series of three injections over the course of a year. The potential side effects of this vaccination are mild: syncope, dizziness, nausea, fever and pain or itching at the injection site. Children that are allergic to yeast and women that are pregnant are advised

against receiving this vaccine [1]. Serious side effects of these vaccine are very rare [4]. Unfortunately, recent media attention has highlighted and exaggerated these side effects, using emotionally charged blogs to discourage parents from vaccinating their children.

Many of these rumors and false allegations account for low vaccination levels, especially in the US. While it is unfortunate that some individuals experience sideeffects, it is also unfortunate that parents without public health education are influencing large groups of people to make choices based on their experiences.

Promoting vaccination among young Americans today does more than protect those individuals that are vaccinated. When 80-90% of a population is immune to a disease, the population experiences herd immunity, which protects even those members of the population that are unvaccinated [6]. As such, the HPV vaccine is an effective public health measure on a large scale. While it is an individualâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s right to not vaccinate, it is not right for individuals without the proper education to be influencing others based on emotional experiences.

Of course no medical advancement is without its side effects, but eliminating tens of thousands of cervical cancer cases seems worth the risk.

references 1. GARDASILÂŽ [Human Papillomavirus Quadrivalent (Types 6,11,16, and

4. CDC - HPV Vaccine for Human Papillomavirus - Preteen-Teen-Adoles-

18) Vaccine, Recombinant] [Internet]. Gardasil.com. 2016 [cited 17 April

cent - Vaccines [Internet]. Cdc.gov. 2016 [cited 17 April 2016]. Available

2016]. Available from: http://www.gardasil.com/

from: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/who/teens/vaccines/hpv.html

2. Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccines [Internet]. National Cancer

5. Erickson N. The CDC and HPV Vaccines: Science or Shameless Pro-

Institute. 2016 [cited 17 April 2016]. Available from: http://www.cancer.

motion?. [Internet]. 2016 [cited 17 April 2016];. Available from: http://sa-

gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/infectious-agents/hpv-vac-

nevax.org/cdc-hpv-vaccines-science-shameless-promotion/

cine-fact-sheet#q7

6. Leonard K. There Are Ways to Get Teens to Vaccinate Against HPV

3. CDC - HPV Vaccine for Human Papillomavirus - Preteen-Teen-Adoles-

[Internet]. US News & World Report. 2015 [cited 17 April 2016]. Available

cent - Vaccines [Internet]. Cdc.gov. 2016 [cited 17 April 2016]. Available

from:

from: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/who/teens/vaccines/hpv.html

cdc-hpv-vaccine-rates-are-up-but-not-high-enough

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2015/07/30/

THE TRIPLE HELIX SPRING 2016 25

SCOPING the

FUTURE

the next generation of telescopes aids the search for life-sustaining exoplanets

BY SABRINA BERGER

T

he Hubble Space Telescope provided stunning and never before seen images of the universe that evoked a feeling of awe in people during its debut in the 1990s. Beautiful photos of galaxies and nebulae (interstellar dust and gas clouds) in space captured by Hubble often seemed more of a work of art than a photo from billions of miles away. Hubbleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s successor, the James Webb Space Telescope ( JWST), will observe these same interstellar sights with the ability to produce

26

even better quality images. JWST is not scheduled for launch into orbit until 2018 [5], but already an even more powerful telescope to complement JWST has been planned. It is capable of imaging outer space 100 times better than the Hubble Space Telescope, but the main focus of this next generation telescope has been to enable greater probability of detection of planets outside of our solar system [4].

In July of 2015, influential physicists Neil deGrasse Tyson and Sara Seager were among those

announcing the next generation telescope at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City [2]. The Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy (AURA) led the study for an extremely powerful telescope capable of capturing ultraviolet to infrared wavelengths, hence dubbed the High Definition Space Telescope (HDST) [4]. Ultraviolet to infrared wavelengths compose light that is both visible and invisible to the human eye. HDST is able to observe more types of light

in velocity. The identification and discovery of many more life-sustaining exoplanets could become possible with the implementation of HDST [4].

Although HDST is still only a plan for a telescope that may not come to fruition for another ten years, the development and research into the telescope’s production needs to start now. The telescope will have a never before seen capacity to expand our

“

identification and discovery of many more life-sustaining exoplanets could become possible with the implementation of HDST

“

than Hubble and JWST, leading to its high-definition capabilities. Although HDST is in the distant future, it will be a revolutionary telescope for all subfields of astrophysics just as its predecessors were.

Researching planets outside of our solar system, known as exoplanets, has been a huge player in the development of HDST. With a 12-meter mirror constructed of 54 segments, HDST will produce extremely clear images compared to those we are capable of today [4]. It will be placed at a SunEarth Lagrange point, which is a gravitationally neutral place in the solar system one million miles away from Earth [3]. The high sensitivity and ideal location of HDST would accelerate our ability to discover habitable exoplanets. A disc that surrounds the mirror of the telescope, called a star shade, will be installed on the HDST to block out over 98% of a star’s light; this advancement is key as this star light often inhibits technology’s ability to capture orbiting exoplanets. This innovation will enable astrophysicists to observe dim objects around stars [4].

Planets far enough from their host stars to be habitable and not too hot for human life are very difficult to detect, but a star shade would enable the telescope to identify this type of exoplanet. We could observe exoplanets directly with HDST, called direct imaging, rather than through external implications of the exoplanet’s presence, such as changes

knowledge of possible locations for extraterrestrial life and the universe in general. The search for funding for HDST needs to begin soon as well because of the great difficulty that can come about when trying to find funding for these large scale telescopes. For example, the Hubble Space Telescope was conceived in the mid 1960s, but it took more than 15

years for the telescope’s funding to be secured [6]. On average, cutting edge space observatories take about 15 to 20 years to develop, construct, and launch into space [4]. The Hubble Space Telescope took 8 years alone just to build [6]. The AURA report released last year presents how the construction, design, and funding for HDST will be possible in the next decade [4], but it is still a tedious and time-consuming task to persuade government officials about the significance of space telescopes.

So, how do astronomers convince the world that we must constantly strive to develop and construct better telescopes? Astronomy does not generally portray itself as an extremely important field to humankind. The possibility of discovering other planets that could foster life often alters people’s perceptions of the need for the development of these telescopes.

As far fetched as it may sound, we may eventually need to inhabit another planet for the survival of our species.

Although the journey would be much longer than a trip to Mars, HDST could help us find the perfect planet to sustain human life. Development of HDST or any other space telescope may not seem obviously important to most Americans. However, in order to safeguard our species from the inevitable exhaustion of Earth’s resources, we must be open to the possibilities of interstellar exploration and exoplanetary colonization.

[1]About the Hubble Space Telescope [Internet]. NASA. 2016 [cited 21

the-high-definition-space-telescope-hubbles-successor/

March 2016]. Available from: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hub-

[4]From Cosmic Birth to Living Earths [Internet]. Association of Universi-

ble/story/

ties for Research in Astronomy. 2016 [cited 9 March 2016]. Available from:

[2]Clery D. Astronomers offer vision of the next giant space telescope [In-

http://www.hdstvision.org/3

ternet]. Science (AAAS). 2016 [cited 22 March 2016]. Available from: http://

[5]JWST Vital Statistics [Internet]. Jwst.nasa.gov. 2016 [cited 21 March

www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/07/astronomers-offer-vision-next-gi-

2016]. Available from: http://jwst.nasa.gov/facts.html

ant-space-telescope

[6]Okolski G. A Brief History of the Hubble Space Telescope [Internet]. His-

[3]Dickinson D. High Definition Space Telescope — Hubble’s Successor? -

tory.nasa.gov. 2016 [cited 5 April 2016]. Available from: http://history.nasa.

Sky & Telescope [Internet]. Sky & Telescope. 2015 [cited 21 March 2016].

gov/hubble/

Available

[6] Photo Source: New Evolution Designs

from:

http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-blogs/

THE TRIPLE HELIX SPRING 2016 27