Anatomy of a glue joint woodworkingnetwork.com Q. We attended your seminar on gluing with Jeff Pitcher. We think that our problem is with the wood surfaces. Can you quickly review those comments? A: To help us understand a glue joint, we use an analogy comparing the joint to the links of a chain, ... |
Originally posted here:
Anatomy of a glue joint - woodworkingnetwork.com
By now, were familiar with the Greys Anatomy casts victories at the Emmys, the Golden Globes, and the Peoples Choice Awards. (The people, in particular, love them some Greys.)
But those high-profile award shows aside, the actors have also earned their own unique honors, and those are the ones were celebrating in this photo gallery!
Greys Anatomy returns for Season 14 this fall on ABC.
Tip: Use keyboard arrows to navigate
The Grey of Greys Anatomy has won three Peoples Choice Awards over the years, but she also won the Special Achievement in Entertaining honor from the National Italian American Foundation in 2007. Ciao bella!
For his work in Season 10, when Alex reconnected with his drug-addict father, Justin received the 2014 PRISM Award for Performance in a Drama Series Multi-Episode Storyline.
The awards show recognizes the accurate depiction of drug, alcohol, and tobacco use and addiction in film, television, interactive, music, DVD, and comic book entertainment.
Chandra won a PRISM Award the same year as Justin and she also has three Image Awards, two BET Awards, and a SAG Award under her belt.
But this actress also won a Theatre World Award way back in 1991 for her performance in the Off-Broadway play The Good Times Are Killing Me.
James won Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Drama Series at the Image Awards in 2012, and hed been nominated in that category for seven consecutive years by that point.
In 1998, a decade before setting foot in the hospital then known as Seattle Grace, Kevin won the International Fantasy Film Award for Best Actor for his role as a cuckolded husband in the film The Acid House.
Jesse was honored with the 2016 BET Humanitarian Award, and his impassioned speech captivated the audience and had America talking (and cheering) for days afterward.
In case you werent aware, Camilla is the latest voice of Lara Croft, and her work on Rise of the Tomb Raider won her a Behind the Voice Actors Award in 2016 in the Best Female Lead Vocal Performance in a Video Game category.
Caterina won a PRISM Award, too accepting the award in 2012, back when she was starring on Greys spin-off Private Practice and plumbing the depths of Amelia Shepherds addiction.
The Alliance for Women in Media Foundation bestowed Debbie with the Lifetime Achievement Award at their Gracie Awards on June 6 and even better, real-life daughter Vivian Nixon and TV son Jesse Williams presented the honor.
[Women] have a real purpose and a real point of view thats very different, she told Variety at the event. By nature, we are the ones that nurture, stand up, and fight.
By now, were familiar with the Greys Anatomy casts victories at the Emmys, the Golden Globes, and the Peoples Choice Awards. (The people, in particular, love them some Greys.)
But those high-profile award shows aside, the actors have also earned their own unique honors, and those are the ones were celebrating in this photo gallery!
Greys Anatomy returns for Season 14 this fall on ABC.
Add your email to get news about your favorite shows or celebrities
Original post:
All the Awesome Awards the 'Grey's Anatomy' Stars Have Won - Wetpaint
Read about behavioral science programs, which help students prepare for careers in psychology, psychiatry, public health, and medical research. Find information about the degree options at four high-ranking universities, as well as a list of other schools in the U.S. that offer studies in behavioral science.
More Programs
Graduate students who are interested in behavioral science can find degree programs at highly ranked schools such as Johns Hopkins University, the University of California in Irvine and Yale University, an Ivy League school. Successful completion of a program can lead to a Master or Doctor of Public Health, Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) or Doctor of Science (Sc.D.).
Johns Hopkins University (JHU) ranked #12 on U.S. News & World Report's list of national universities for 2015. The university offers 50 major areas of study through nine schools, including the Bloomberg School of Public Health. Students can earn a Doctor of Public Health in Social & Behavioral Sciences (Ph.D.) and a Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in Social and Behavioral Sciences with research in Health Education & Communication and Social & Psychological Influences on Health.
U.S. News & World Report ranked the University of California in Irvine #42 among national universities in 2015. The university offers a Master of Arts and Ph.D. in Mathematical Behavioral Sciences. Students in the programs use mathematical models to study human behavior.
Yale University ranked third on the U.S. News & World Report list of national universities for 2015. Graduate programs include a Master of Public Health in Social and Behavioral Sciences. Ph.D. candidates pursuing a degree in the social and behavioral sciences can study psychosocial and behavioral epidemiology.
Here is the original post:
Top Schools for Behavioral Science - Study.com
Estimated reading time: 4 minute(s)
At its core, Maritz is a people-centered company. As a St. Louis-based business solutions company that offers incentives, rewards, customer experience, loyalty, employee engagement and events, Maritz makes clear itsfocus on understanding, enabling and motivating people and behavior with its signature statement, The science and art of people and potential.
With more than100 years of leadership in the motivation industry, Maritz has continued to innovate and invest in the understanding of behavioral science. The companyhas honed and developed itsexpertise in the science of human behavior, and now Maritz isinnovating even further with the appointment of Charlotte Blank to the position of chief behavioral officer (CBO). Blanks primary role will be to lead the companys thought leadership and application of the latest insights in applied behavioral science, primarily through extensive partnerships with leading academic experts pioneering the field.
In appointing a CBO, Maritz joins a growing trend in companies hiring a top executive to focus on behavioral science in business. According to the websiteRecode, the recent rise of the CBO has developed because companies are becoming more committed to putting the customer first. The article states, In the modern economy, companies that anticipate pain points and bring certainty and reliable information to the customer experience are rewarded with loyal customers. It should be no surprise, then, that companies that put customer experiences at the center of their products and services are often industry leaders.
Behavioral research plays a critical role in creating those customer experiences. While behavioral science is at the heart of Maritz work, the hiring of a C-suite executive shows itscommitment to this science and the research that backs it up, helping it and itscustomers make more strategic business decisions.
Blank explains, Our goal is to elevate the concept that behavioral science is foundational to everything we do at Maritz. Everything in the company is touched by and grounded in behavioral science. We are helping to power and infuse the latest discoveries in behavioral science throughout the organization and beyond.
The beyond that Blank refers to applies not only to the business applications of behavioral science for Maritz own clients but expands to the field of applied behavioral science itself.
Behavioral science is, in essence, the study of human behavior, says Blank. The evolving fields of behavioral economics and social psychology have tremendous potential for application to business solutions in the real world. How do these insights come to light in our evolving business context? What makes the sales leader, the employee or the customer tick? What motivates and engages them? These are the insights were looking for.
Field research is the new focus.
Many of the existing principles that are currently used in behavioral science today come from lab studies or lean more toward the theoretical. But Blank believes, There is a lot of opportunity to see how these insights come about in real-world application. The Maritz Field Research Collaborative connects our robust networks on both the academic side as well as our clients across a diverse set of stakeholders. Were bringing this platform together to conduct field research, and testing insights from the lab in the real worldwhich is a huge benefit to our clients, and an opportunity for us to learn. From a personal standpoint, I like that were contributing to the collective body of knowledge, helping to evolve the field itself of applied behavioral science. There is so much opportunity for real world application, and its nice to be a part of that.
Many of the experiments that Maritz has planned center around determining how to optimize rewards. The research is ongoing, and publishable results will follow once the studies are complete, but Blank offers a couple of examples of the incentives theyre exploring, like giving people the gift of time back in their personal lives or creating social experiences in the workplace and meeting environment. We are looking at these innovative rewards concepts and measuring how they affect people. Another interesting project were working on looks at technology design and the interface of mobile devices and how that influences the way people answer survey questions. The psychological mindset is different when people are on a mobile device versus a desktop, and that has implications for how they answer customer feedback surveys.
Applying Behavioral Science as a Startup
Blank seems to have found that elusive balance where her personal passions have blended with her professional endeavors. When asked what incentivizes and motivates her, she responded by saying, I am motivated by learning and intellectual curiosity. Im a behavioral science nerd. My idea of a beach read is Daniel Kahnemans Thinking Fast and Slow. Im re-reading it on vacation next week. So, to read and apply this type of material as my job is a really great alignment for me both personally and professionally.
Maritz has been around for more than120 years, yet began as a startup and still continues to innovate and stay at the cutting edge of its industry. When asked what advice she would give to startups applying behavior science, Blank offered several nuggets of wisdom. Take a people-centered point of view. Anchor whatever it is youre offering to a higher purpose tie it to a personal goal for your employees. Create a tribe so that there is a sense of belonging and cohesion. And keeping with the theme of field research, she suggests, Embrace the scientific method. Conduct experiments, do pilot testing and controlled trials to see what really works. Startups have an advantage because theyre small and nimble in the beginning. The can get real data very easily. She adds one last piece of advice. Test and Learn. A.B.T. Always Be Testing.
Startups and large corporations alike are invited to participate in field experiments with the Maritz Field Research Collaborative. To begin exploring behavioral insights of your stakeholders, contact fieldresearch@maritz.com.
SAN DIEGO -- One of the goals for any new coach is to create a winning culture that unites players under one accord.
Los Angeles Chargers head coach Anthony Lynn believes hes accomplishing that task during offseason work at Chargers Park.
Under first-year strength coach John Lott, players were put through an arduous new conditioning program that focused on long-distance running, with the hope that the endurance training would lead to less injuries and better stamina at the end of games.
It was huge, Lynn said. If youre going to finish games in the fourth quarter, you have to be in shape. You and I both know it. It doesnt take talent to be in great shape. That can be a competitive advantage for us.
In addition, assistant coaches like defensive coordinator Gus Bradley and special-teams coordinator George Stewart have brought a new intensity and energy to the players they coach.
You can tell they really like one another, Lynn said. Its a competition, but you have veteran guys and the young guys. The young guys are standing out, working hard with veteran guys.
I like what were seeing from the team, chemistry-wise. I think thats why its so important were all here in the offseason and doing this together. Because when the season starts, you dont have time to build chemistry.
Unlike the other 31 NFL teams, the Chargers will be in the midst of relocating to Los Angeles once training camp starts at the end of July. After the teams mandatory minicamp from June 13-15 concludes, employees will pack up Chargers Park and begin the 100-mile move to Costa Mesa in Orange County.
The Chargers will hold training camp at Jack Hammett Sports Complex near Costa Mesa High School. Once training camp finishes at the end of August, the team plans to move into its new headquarters nearby.
The Chargers are also slated to play in the intimate 30,000-seat StubHub Center in Carson, California, for the next three seasons.
The transition to a new city could be a distraction for players. The Chargers only have to look at what happened last season to the Los Angeles Rams, who finished 4-12 and fired head coach Jeff Fisher near the end of the season.
Chargers players, however, believe the move a few hours north will not be an excuse for what happens on the field in 2017.
Im still a Charger, said cornerback Casey Hayward, who signed with the team as a free agent last offseason after spending his first four years in the NFL with the Green Bay Packers. Were still going to be in California, and in a great city in L.A. in the Orange County area, so you cant beat that. Were still going to be in sunny California, so I like it.
Lynn said the focus during minicamp next week will be fine-tuning what players have learned during offseason work.
We will continue our install, Lynn said. Well go back through it for the third time. Guys should own it, to be honest with you, next week. And they should play a little faster, a little more confident, but I still expect the same spirit, the same competition that you saw today.
Read more:
Chargers optimistic budding chemistry will lead to more wins in L.A. ... - ESPN (blog)
Even during OTAs, Aaron Rodgers and Jordy Nelson are capable of producing the wow play for the Green Bay Packers.
During a team drill on Tuesday, Rodgers and Nelson delivered one of those special plays with Rodgers threading the needle between two defenders and Nelson contorting his body to get two feet inbounds along the back of the end zone for the score.
The chemistry between Rodgers and Nelson remains inextinguishable.
We know each other on the field really well, Rodgers said on Tuesday. He understands when the balls coming out, where he needs to be in certain spots. Weve done so many things in practice over the years. Hes always seeing the game through the quarterbacks eyes. He knows timing and spacing and second and third reactions better than anybody thats ever been here.
Even after Nelson missed the entire 2015 season with a knee injury, the connection between quarterback and receiver never suffered. Rodgers found Nelson for 97 completions and 1,257 yards in 2017, with 14 of the connections ending in touchdowns. No other quarterback and receiver combined for more last season.
How do two players so in sync get better during a June practice? Rodgers said the key is always working to build the chemistry.
Its just continuing to try and stay on the same page with him, and build, Rodgers said. Every season hes been healthy, weve had some pretty big years.
The numbers are undeniable. Over his last five healthy seasons, Nelson has produced 397 catches, 6,098 yards and 57 touchdowns with the majority of the production coming from the right arm of Rodgers. He also has four seasons with at least 1,200 yards and three with 12 or more touchdowns.
Rodgers and Nelson will enter their ninth season together in 2017. The chemistry between quarterback and receiver remains as strong as ever.
View original post here:
Packers QB Aaron Rodgers explains chemistry with Jordy Nelson - Packers Wire
[+]Enlarge
Waterhouse
Credit: Eleni Kardaras Photography
Vitals
Education: Ph.D., synthetic organic chemistry, University of California, Berkeley
Professional highlight: Honorary doctorate from the University of Bordeaux, a school with a wine program that dates back to 1880, the same year the viticulture and enology program started at the University of California
Favorite molecule: Acetaldehyde, which is a key wine oxidation product
Favorite way to enjoy a glass of wine: Barrel sampling with friends
Favorite city: Ljubljana, Slovenia. The food is wonderful; things are organized; there are many excellent local wines to taste and not too many tourists.
For Andrew L. Waterhouse, being tasked with wine selection when having drinks with family, friends, or inquisitive journalists is something of an occupational hazard. Its just part of the job, the professor of viticulture and enology at the University of California, Davis, says.
Its a good bet that Waterhouse will pick a winning wine. Hes widely respected for his expansive knowledge of wine chemistry and has educated a generation of winemakers during his 26 years teaching in UC Daviss world-renowned program.
But Waterhouse hasnt always been a wine connoisseur. With training in natural product synthesis, he started his career at a different school teaching organic chemistry primarily to premed students and researching conformational analysis of polysaccharides. One day, while paging through C&EN on a flight, Waterhouse saw a job posting for an assistant professor of viticulture and enology at UC Davis. He wanted to return to the West Coast, where he went to school, so he applied.
As soon as I heard I got the job, I started reading, he remembers. Professionally, I knew nothing. I was a wine lover, but I had no idea what was in wine, really, other than alcohol. Now he studies wines complex natural products, such as flavonoids. Winemakers call it chicken wire chemistry, he says, because the hexagons in the flavonoid structures resemble chicken wire to those untrained in chemistry.
Waterhouse says when he first started at UC Davis he tried to teach organic chemistry to budding winemakers the same way he taught it to premeds. It didnt work, he says. For example, when he taught his students about terpenesimportant flavor compounds in certain wines such as Rieslingshe discussed how the compounds undergo acid-catalyzed rearrangement during aging.
I was showing the students allylic cations forming, rearranging, and eliminating. And it was completely useless to them, he says. They have to understand something about terpene chemistry, but they dont have to understand mechanistic transformations from one terpene to another. This made Waterhouse completely rethink how he taught chemistry to these students. He needed to talk about chemistry that would be useful in wine making. Thats why they take classesthey want to understand whats happening so they can manage it better. Its a very applied use of chemistry.
And students of wine chemistry differ from premeds in another way, Waterhouse found. Whether the wine-making students are pursuing bachelors, masters, or doctoral degrees, all approach the subject with passion, Waterhouse says. When I was teaching organic chemistry to premeds, they had no interest in the subject. They just needed an A. It was a hurdle class for them and they didnt like it. Thats not the case with the students he teaches at UC Davis, he says. They really want to know the information, and they want to know why it is useful.
In 2016, after 25 years as a wine chemist, Waterhouse decided to create a resource for others who might be interested in teaching the subject or for chemists who are just interested in knowing more about the chemistry of wine. Along with Cornell Universitys Gavin L. Sacks and the University of Adelaides David W. Jeffery, he coauthored Understanding Wine Chemistry.
The book, he says, is different from other wine chemistry resources because it focuses on the organic chemistry of wine. Most of the chemists in the field are analytical chemists, and theyre very good at that, but when they write about it, they focus on analytical issues, such as comparing analytical results with taste and sensory results. While thats important, Waterhouse says, he and his coauthors wanted to create a book on the chemical reactions that take place in wine.
Just by understanding the chemistry you can intervene in very simple ways, Waterhouse notes. For example, sauvignon blanc wines from New Zealand are known for a guava- and passion-fruit-type aroma, but that fruity note would often be missing after storage. An organic chemist figured out that the aroma arises from an ester that can hydrolyze. Now, New Zealand winemakers keep the sauvignon blanc as cold as they can until its bottled and shipped, thus preserving that flavor. So understanding chemistry is very powerful, even in wine making, Waterhouse points out.
But, Waterhouse is quick to add, chemistry does not have all the answers. When I came to Davis, I thought all we have to do is figure out what are the key molecules that are present in great wine. Many people have this idea, and I was not any different. It turns out that there have been a lot of smart people thinking about this for a really long time, he says.
What Ive discovered is that its not really just the chemistry that makes wine interesting or valuable. Theres a lot more behind the story of wine than chemistry. I know that might be disappointing for some chemists, but the reality is that people love wine. And people love wine not just because of the way it tastes. They love wine for many reasons, he says. When youre a winemaker one of the key things you have to be able to do is convey a message about your producta story about yourself or the land or the history of the property. Those things are, in some way, more important to a wine drinker than wine that just tastes good.
Read this article:
The secret to great wine? Organic chemistry. - Chemical & Engineering News
Swedish producer of leafy greens, herbs, and ornamental flowers grows faster and better during winter than summer since switching from HPS to Fluence VYPRx PLUS LED solutions
Austin, TX (PRWEB) June 08, 2017
Fluence Bioengineering today announced Hllns Handelstrdgrd, one of Sweden's largest producers of organic leafy greens, herbs, and ornamental flowers, has seen a dramatic improvement in crop production since upgrading its supplemental greenhouse lighting from high pressure sodium (HPS) to Fluence LED-based solutions. The upgrade to Fluence LED solutions has increased bench turns, crop yield and quality, and energy efficiency coupled with a decrease in lead time and shrink.
To help Hllns Handelstrdgrd achieve their goals of increasing year-round, consistent crop production, Fluence developed lighting solutions specific to their unique growing conditions just south of the Arctic Circle in Northern Sweden. To learn more, and to get a behind-the-scenes look into Hllns Handelstrdgrd's operation, visit http://fluence.science/hallnas
"We are seeing reduced lead times and higher yields under the Fluence LED systems, with finished product quality that exceeds everything we have seen before," said Bjrn Isacsson, owner at Hllns Handelstrdgrd. "Not only have the products from Fluence surpassed our expectations, but the team has proven invaluable with support and services to help our business grow."
"All we can see are these great results: better quality and more compact plants," said Philip Stawarz, Head Grower at Hllns Handelstrdgrd. "Growing with HPS was like it was, lamps on or off. Now with Fluence, life is much more interesting as I can manipulate plants how I want."
With the addition of VYPRx PLUS lighting solutions, Hllns is now able to grow higher quality plants faster during winter (when there is little sunlight), than during the summer due to the improved light intensity and spectrum, and ideal growing environment Fluence lighting solutions create. The company has deployed VYPRx PLUS with PhysioSpec Greenhouse, a broad spectrum for full-cycle plant growth and development, along with VYPRx PLUS with AnthoSpec, a custom narrow-band spectrum which increases anthocyanin accumulation in lettuce. The deployment of AnthoSpec resulted in a deep red color and higher antioxidant properties which were previously unattainable under HPS or sunlight.
"It is a pleasure working with the team at Hllns Handelstrdgrd as we collaborate to develop solutions which have proven to successfully help them achieve their cultivation and financial goals," said Nick Klase, Co-Founder and CEO at Fluence Bioengineering. "Every environment and every customer's needs are uniquethat's why we focus on building deep relationships with our customers to achieve results which are unattainable by any other means."
In addition to Hllns Handelstrdgrd, VYPRx PLUS LED systems have been deployed at hundreds of commercial crop production facilities and research institutions worldwide. Fluence lighting solutions have been independently verified to be the most energy efficient, powerful and efficacious, resulting in high-quality, high-yield crop production facilities. Learn more at https://fluence.science/vypr
About Fluence Bioengineering Fluence Bioengineering is a photobiology design company exploring physiological plant development under various levels of photosynthetically active radiation and custom spectra. The company partners with leading research institutions to engineer the most powerful and efficient horticulture lighting solutions for both science and commercial applications. All Fluence systems are designed and built in Austin, TX, USA. https://fluence.science
###
For the original version on PRWeb visit: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2017/06/prweb14401620.htm
Continued here:
Fluence Bioengineering Improves Year-Round Quality and Consistency of Crop Production at Hllns Handelstrdgrd - Benzinga
BUARABA'S Fred From says the secret to a long and happy life is to keep active, be happy and to not worry.
Mr From was living proof of his own advice as he celebrated his 100th birthday on May 30. And in a display of his full and fortunate life more than 150 people turned out to celebrate his milestone birthday at Forest Hill Hall.
The ex-farmer, army officer, environmentalist and academic revealed he had always tried to lead a healthy life.
"I always played sports - like football and never smoked - if anything helped me that would have been the thing, he said.
"I don't feel any different turning 100.
Born in a military hospital in Brisbane, Mr From grew up and attended school in Lowood.
"I've lived in the Lockyer practically all my life - except when I joined the army for four years in the Second World War, Mr From said.
"I was 23 years old.
"I served in Cyprus, New Guinea, Egypt and later in Korea - after Korea I came back and went to the university to study agriculture.
"I studied there for six months, then I married Lola Brimblecombe.
Over many years, Mr From farmed cattle, grapes, watermelon and sweet potato on his Burarbra farm.
Later on, Mr From became heavily involved in agriculture and the environment and helped to set up an environmental reserve with some friends when Atkinson Dam was constructed in the early 1970s.
In the year 2000 he was awarded an Order of Australia for his extensive work in agriculture.
Mr From said he had been blessed with a fortunate life.
"I've had a happy family and social life, he said.
"I recieved a letter from the Queen and several other dignitaries, it was wonderful.
More here:
Fred From's secret to longevity: don't worry, be happy - Gatton Star
Cottons environmental footprint is much less noticeable today than was the case in the early 1960s, thanks largely to science and technology.
Ryan Kurtz, director of agricultural research, Cotton Incorporated, says the highly successful Boll Weevil Eradication Program, genetic engineering, innovations in tillage, and changes in farm size and efficiency combined to reduce cottons impact on the environment over the past 35 years.
[Kurtz] said cotton farming has evolved from horses to robots and drones. Weve seen great strides in reduced soil loss, water use, and pesticide use.
Biotechnology now protects plants from insect damage, Kurtz said. Herbicide tolerant varieties also allow a more efficient weed management system. Cotton farmers also reduce energy consumption because of biotech, he added.
Genetic engineering has improved varieties in other ways. We have more water efficient varieties, which improves on a plant already known for drought tolerance.
[T]he success of the Boll Weevil Eradication Program and the introduction of Bt cotton revolutionized insect control in cotton. At one time, cotton farmers in some areas were spraying as many as 15 times in a season. The average was seven. Following boll weevil eradication, the average dropped to five, and after Bt cotton was introduced the average dipped to two.
The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion, and analysis. Read full, original post: Cottons effect on the environment continues to diminish
More:
How genetic engineering helped reduce cotton's environmental footprint - Genetic Literacy Project
Executive Summary
Human judgment is often biased in predictably problematic ways. In the case of cybersecurity, some decision makers use the wrong mental models to help them determine how much investment is necessary. These mental models treat cybersecurity as a finite problem that can be solved, rather than as the ongoing process that it is. Our research points to steps that security executives and other cybersecurity professionals can take to work around CEOs human biases and motivate decision makers to invest more in cyber infrastructure. Appeal to the emotions of financial decision makers. Replace your CEOs mental model with new success metrics. Survey your peers to help curb overconfidence. You are the weakest link. By turning the lens of behavioral science onto cybersecurity challenges, CISOs can identify new ways to approach old problems, and maybe improve their budgets at the same time.
Determining the ROI for any cybersecurity investment, from staff training to AI-enabled authentication managers, can best be described as an enigma shrouded in mystery. The digital threat landscape changes constantly, and its very difficult to know the probability of any given attack succeeding or how big the potential losses might be. Even the known costs, such as penalties for data breaches in highly regulated industries like health care, are a small piece of the ROI calculation. In the absence of good data, decision makers must use something less than perfect to weigh the options: their judgment.
But insights from behavioral economics and psychology show that human judgment is often biased in predictably problematic ways. In the case of cybersecurity, some decision makers use the wrong mental models to help them determine how much investment is necessary and where to invest. For example, they may think about cyber defense as a fortification process if you build strong firewalls, with well-manned turrets, youll be able to see the attacker from a mile away. Or they may assume that complying with a security framework like NIST or FISMA is sufficient security just check all the boxes and you can keep pesky attackers at bay. They may also fail to consider the counterfactual thinking We didnt have a breach this year, so we dont need to ramp up investment when in reality they probably either got lucky this year or are unaware that a bad actor is lurking in their system, waiting to strike.
The problem with these mental models is that they treat cybersecurity as a finite problem that can be solved, rather than as the ongoing process that it is. No matter how fortified a firm may be, hackers, much like water, will find the cracks in the wall. Thats why cybersecurity efforts have to focus on risk management, not risk mitigation. But this pessimistic outlook makes for a very tough sell. How can security executives get around the misguided thinking that leads to underinvestment, and secure the resources they need?
Over the past year, my behavioral science research and design firm, ideas42, has been interviewing experts across the cybersecurity space and conducting extensive research to identify human behavioral challenges at the levels of engineers, end users, IT administrators, and executives. Weve uncovered insights about why people put errors into code, fail to install software updates, and poorly manage access permissions. (We delve into these challenges in Deep Thought: A Cybersecurity Story, a research-based novella.) Our findings point to steps that security executives and other cybersecurity professionals can take to work around CEOs human biases and motivate decision makers to invest more in cyber infrastructure.
Appeal to the emotions of financial decision makers. The way that information is conveyed to us has a huge effect on how we receive and act on it. For cybersecurity professionals, its intuitive to describe cyber risk in terms of the integrity and availability of data, or with quantifiable metrics like packet loss, but these concepts arent likely to resonate with decision makers who think about risk very differently. Instead, cybersecurity professionals should take into account peoples tendency to overweight information that portrays consequences vividly and tugs at their emotions. To leveragethis affect bias, security professionals should explain cyber risk by using clear narratives that connect to risk areas that high-level decision makers are familiar with and already care deeply about. For example, your companys risk areas may include customer data loss as well as the regulatory costs and PR fallout that can affect the companys reputation. Its not just about data corruption its also about how the bad data will reduce operational efficiency and bring production lines to a standstill.
Replace your CEOs mental model with new success metrics. Everyone uses mental models to distill complexity into something manageable. Having the wrong mental model about what a cybersecurity program is supposed to do can be the difference between a thwarted attack and a significant breach. Some CEOs may think that security investments are for building an infrastructure, that creating a fortified castle is all thats needed to keep a company safe. With this mental picture, the goals of a financial decision maker will always be oriented toward risk mitigation instead of risk management.
To get around this, CISOs should work with boards and financial decision makers to reframe metrics for success in terms of the number of vulnerabilities that are found and fixed. No cybersecurity system will ever be impenetrable, so working to find the cracks will shift leaders focus from building the right system to building the right process. Counterintuitively, a firms security team uncovering more vulnerabilities should be considered a positive sign. All systems have bugs, and all humans can be hacked, so treating vulnerabilities as shortcomings will create an unintended incentive for an internal security team to hide them. Recognize that the stronger the security processes and team capabilities are, the more vulnerabilities theyll discover (and be able to fix).
Survey your peers to help curb overconfidence. Overconfidence is a pervasive bias, and it can be a big problem if it clouds leaders judgment about cybersecurity investment. Our research found that many C-level executives believe that their own investments in cybersecurity are sufficient but that few of their peers are investing enough (a belief that, given how widespread it is, cant possible be true). One way that CISOs can overcome a CEOs overconfidence is to compare the companys performance with a baseline from similar firms in other words, confront the problem head-on. You can accomplish this by regularly polling CISOs and executives about how well organizations in your industry are managing cybersecurity infrastructure, prompting them to be as specific as possible about what theyare doing well and what theyre not, and asking those same CISOs to help determine how well your own firm is doing. This way, CISOs can provide clearer information to CEOs about how they are actually performing relative to their industry peers.
You are the weakest link. In her essay Regarding the Pain of Others, Susan Sontag wrote, To photograph is to frame, and to frame is to exclude. Human attention functions quite similarly. People concentrate on certain aspects of information in their environment while ignoring others; what a CEO chooses to invest in can be thought of in a similar light. For instance, in the wake of a newsworthy hack, CEOs may push their teams to ramp up investment in cyber infrastructure to prot
ect against external threats. But in doing so they may be inattentive to unwitting internal threats that may be just as costly employees clicking on bad links, or falling for phishing attacks.
How can a CISO work around a decision makers inattention? No one likes to be embarrassed, but negative feedback can sometimes be an effective remedy for inattention. Security teams should regularly try to break their own systems through penetration testing, and the CEO should be the biggest target. After all, thats how outside hackers would see it. By making the CEO the victim of an internally initiated (and safe) attack, it might be possible to draw their attention to potential risks that already exist and motivate leaders to increase their investment in cyber infrastructure.
If the focus of cybersecurity programs continues to be on designing better technologies to combat the growing menace of cyberattacks, well continue to neglect the most important aspect of security the person in the middle. By turning the lens of behavioral science onto cybersecurity challenges, CISOs can identify new ways to approach old problems, and maybe improve their budgets at the same time.
Excerpt from:
The Behavioral Economics of Why Executives Underinvest in Cybersecurity - Harvard Business Review
LAFAYETTE, La. -
The University of Louisiana at Lafayette is launching a new online degree program in general studies designed for working professionals.
In a press release, the university says their aim for this new online degree is to entice former students who did not graduate,to finish earning their degrees. The program has been designed for working professionals to take classes at their own pace while balancing other obligations.
"The purpose of the degree program is to provide an avenue for those adult students who have 'stopped out' of higher education. The online venue provides an opportunity that is affordable, flexible and student-centered," said Dr. Bobbie B. DeCuir, dean of University College.
Three concentrations will be offered in the General Studies degree program including arts and humanities, behavioral science and applied science. Classes will range from a number of departments at the university and will allow for customization to class schedules.
"While many new jobs require specialized training in technology-related areas, there is a need for graduates who are broadly trained to think analytically and critically while also demonstrating effective communication skills," Decuir added.
Those looking to enroll in these classes must have completed at least 45 credit hours and maintained a minimum 2.0 GPA. UL Lafayette will continue to offer a bachelor's degree in general studies in a traditional classroom setting.
The application deadline is July 15. Visit onlinedegrees.louisiana.edu for more information.
The rest is here:
UL Lafayette to offer online General Studies degree program - KATC.com | Continuous News Coverage | Acadiana ... - KATC Lafayette News
Share on Pinterest Pin it
Share on Google Plus Plus
Too much caffeine caused the death of a 16-year-old high school student from South Carolina who collapsed during class last month, according to the county coroner. Davis Allen Cripe died from a caffeine-induced cardiac event causing a probable arrhythmia.
During an arrhythmia, or abnormal heart rhythm, the heart may not be able to pump enough blood to the body, and lack of blood flow affects the brain, heart and other organs. The teen consumed three caffeine-laced drinksa cafe latte, large Diet Mountain Dew and an energy drinkin a two-hour period before collapsing in his classroom at Spring Hill High School on April 26, Watts said.
So where does this tragic news leave adultjava lovers?
How much caffeine can I drink a day? Most people can safely take in about 400 milligrams of caffeine daily or about 4 cups of coffee, says Dr. Christopher Calapai D.O., a New York City Osteopathic Physician board certified in family and anti-aging medicine.
He adds that the limit varies from person to person. Its difficult to assign an exact amount for everyone because people can have different sensitivities or reactions to caffeine based on age, medical history, and tolerance. However, there is enough research available to make a recommendation based on an individuals weight.
To keep it safe, health experts recommend a maximum daily dose of 400 mg. To see what this means for you, check out the caffeine in some of these common drinks:
Starbucks Coffee (16 fl oz): 320 mg caffeine 5-hour energy (1.93 fl oz): 207 mg caffeine Dunkin Donuts regular (16 fl oz): 203 mg caffeine Starbucks Latte (16 fl oz): 150 mg caffeine Coffee, brewed (8 fl oz): 133 mg caffeine Red Bull Energy Shot (2 fl oz): 80 mg caffeine Red Bull (8 fl oz): 80 mg caffeine Tea (8 fl oz): 53 mg caffeine
But how, exactly, can the worlds most popular drug kill? Like other stimulants, caffeine raises blood pressure, boosts heart rate and temporarily shrinks blood vessels.
Dr. Calapai explains, In excess, the effects can be deadly by causing a heart attack, stroke or other cardio-vascular-related problem. Researchers think daily caffeine intake can increase the risk of coronary heart disease, but the results so far have been inconclusive.
Its also important to realize that medical conditions can affect sensitivity to caffeine. If you have anxiety, panic disorder, heart arrhythmia, high blood pressure, diabetes, take medication or have any sort of medical condition, then you may tolerate less caffeine and should speak to a doctor, says Dr. Calapai.
Here are crucial caffeine overdose symptoms to watch for: Jitters, Restlessness, and Nervousness Increased heartbeat Nausea Anxiety Heart palpitations (cardiac arrhythmia) Insomnia Sweating Dizziness Vomiting Cardiac arrest
Read more from the original source:
Can You Actually Die From Too Much Caffeine? - BOSS Magazine
6th June 2017 - Author: Luke Gallin
French insurer and reinsurer SCOR has announced the appointment ofseasoned longevity risk transfer executive,Wolfgang Murmann, as itsnewHead of Longevity for Europe, the Middle East and Africa (EMEA).
The appointment ofMurmann, who has a solid track record in longevity risk transfer markets and joins from asset management firm, Insight Investment, will enable SCOR to expand its coverage forthe continental European longevity risk transfer and reinsurance marketplace.
While at Insight Investment he focused on solutions for pensions and institutions, and time spent at bothCommerzbank AG andDresdner Kleinwort also grew his experience and knowledge in the sector.
Longevity risk is seen as one of the growth areas in the reinsurance market, with pension schemes increasingly looking to hedge their growing longevity exposure, essentially protecting themselves against the exposure ofcohorts living longer than initially anticipated.
SCOR has participated in a number of large longevity risk transactions over the years, acting as botha lead reinsurance provider and alsomore traditionally structured longevity reinsurance arrangements inmore recent times. The expansion of its longevity team should enable the re/insurer to increase its presence in the European longevity risk transfer market.
Share on Google Plus Share
View original post here:
SCOR expands EMEA longevity risk capabilities with new appointment - Reinsurance News (registration)
Last month, researchers announced some astonishing findings in Nature Genetics: Theyd found 40 genes that play a role in shaping human intelligence, bringing the total number of known intelligence genes up to 52.
This study was a big deal because while weve known intelligence is largely heritable, we havent understood the specifics of the biology of IQ why it can be so different between people, and why we can lose it near the end of life.
The Nature Genetics study was a key early step toward understanding this, hailed as an enormous success in the New York Times.
And there are many more insights like this to come. The researchers used a design called a genome-wide association study. In it, computers comb through enormous data sets of human genomes to find variations among them that point to disease or traits like intelligence. As more people have their genomes sequenced, and as computers become more sophisticated at seeking out patterns in data, these types of studies will proliferate.
But theres also a deep uneasiness at the heart of this research it is easily misused by people who want to make claims about racial superiority and differences between groups. Such concerns prompted Nature to run an editorial stressing that the new science of genetics and intelligence comes to no such conclusions. Environment is crucial, too, Nature emphasized. The existence of genes for intelligence would not imply that education is wasted on people without those genes. Geneticists burned down that straw man long ago.
Also, nothing in this work suggests there are genetic difference in intelligence when comparing people of different ancestries. If anything, it suggests that the genetics that give rise to IQ are more subtle and intricate than we can ever really understand.
Were going to keep getting better at mapping the genes that make us smart, make us sick, or even make us lose our hair. But old fears and myths about genetics and determinism will rear their heads. So will fears about mapping ideal human genes that will lead to designer babies, where parents can pick traits for their children la carte.
To walk through the science, and to bust its myths, I spoke to Danielle Posthuma, a statistical geneticist at Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam, who was the senior author on the latest Nature study.
Theres a simple understanding of genetics were all taught in high school. We learn, as Gregor Mendel discovered with pea plants, that we can inherit multiple forms of the same gene. One variation of the gene makes wrinkled peas; the other makes for round peas. Its true, but its hardly the whole story.
In humans, a few traits and illnesses work like this. Whether the bottom of your earlobes stick to the side of your face or hang free is the result of one gene. Huntingtons disease which deteriorates nerve cells in the brain is the result of a single gene.
But most of the traits that make you you your height, your personality, your intellect arise out of a complex constellation of genes. There might be 1,000 genes that influence intelligence, for example. Same goes for the genes that lead to certain disorders. Theres no one gene for schizophrenia, for obesity, for depression.
A single gene for one of these things also wont have an appreciable impact on behavior. If you have the bad variant of one gene for IQ, maybe your IQ score ... is 0.001 percent lower than it would have been, Posthuma says.
But if you have 100 bad variants, or 1,000, then that might make a meaningful difference.
Genome-wide association studies allow scientists to start to see how combinations of many, many genes interact in complicated ways. And it takes huge data sets to sort through all the genetic noise and find variants that truly make a difference on traits like intelligence.
The researchers had one: the UK Biobank, a library that contains genetic, health, and behavioral information on 500,000 Britons. For the study, they pulled complete genome information on 78,000 individuals who had also undergone intelligence testing. Then a computer program combed through millions of sites on the gene code where people tend to variate from one another, and singled out the areas that correlated with smarts.
The computer processing power needed for this kind of research this study had to crunch 9.3 million DNA letters from 78,000 people hasnt been available very long. But now that it is, researchers have been starting to piece together the puzzle that links genes to behaviors.
A recent genome-wide analysis effort identified 250 gene sites that predicted male pattern baldness in a sample of 52,000 men. (Would you really want to know if you had them?) And theres been progress identifying genes that signal risk for diabetes, schizophrenia, and depression.
And these studies dont just look at traits, diseases, and behavior. Theyre also starting to analyze genetic associations to life outcomes. A 2016 paper in Nature reported on 74 gene sites that correlate with educational attainment. (These genes, the study authors note, seem to have something to do with the formation of neurons.) Again, these associations are tiny the study found that these 74 gene variants could only explain 3 percent of the difference between any two people on what level of education they achieve. Its hardly set in stone that youll flunk school if you dont have these gene variants.
But still, they make a small significant difference once you start looking at huge numbers of people.
Its important to note that Posthumas study was only on people of European ancestry. Whatever we find for Europeans doesnt necessarily [extrapolate] for Asians or South Americans, [or any other group] she says. Those things are often misused.
Which is to say: The gene variations that produce the differences between Europeans arent necessarily the same variations that produce differences among groups of different ancestry. So if you were to test the DNA of someone of African origin, and saw they lacked these genes, it would be incredibly irresponsible to conclude they had a lower capacity for intelligence. (Again, there are also likely hundreds of more genetic sites that have something to do with intellect that have yet to be discovered.)
Posthumas work identifying genes associated with intelligence isnt about making predictions about how smart a baby might grow up to be. She doesnt think you can reliably predict educational or intelligence outcomes from DNA alone. This is all really about reverse-engineering the biology of intelligence.
Genes code for proteins. Proteins then interact with other proteins. Researchers can trace this pathway all the way up to the level of behavior. And somewhere along that path, there just might be a place where we can intervene and stop age-related cognitive decline, for instance, and Alzheimers.
We're finally starting to see robust reliable associations from genes with their behavior, she says. The next step is how do we prove that this gene is actually evolved in a disorder, and how does it work?
Understanding the biology of intelligence could also lead the way for personalized approaches to treating neurodegenerative diseases. Its possible that two people with Alzheimers may have different underlying genetic causes. Knowing which genes are causing the disease, then, you might be able to tailor the treatment, Posthuma says.
As more and more genome-wide studies are conducted, the more researchers will be able to assign people polygenic risk scores for how susceptible they might be for certain traits and diseases. That can lead to early interventions. (Or, perhaps in the wrong hands, a cruel and unfair sorting of society. Have you seen the movie Gattaca?)
And there are some worries about abusing this data, especially as more and more people get their genomes analyzed by commercial companies like 23&Me.
Many people are concerned that insurance companies will use it, she says. That they will look into people's DNA and say, Well, you have a very high risk of being a nicotine addict. So we want you to pay more. Or, You have a high risk of dying early from cancer. So you have to pay more early in life. And of course, that's all nonsense. Its still too complicated to make such precise predictions.
We now have powerful tools to edit genes. CRISPR/Cas9 makes it possible to cut out any specific gene and replace it with another. Genetic engineering has advanced to the point where scientists are building whole organisms from the ground up with custom DNA.
Its easy to indulge our imaginations here: Genome-wide studies are going to make it easier to predict what set of genes leads to certain life outcomes. Genetic engineering is making it easier to assemble whatever genes we want in an individual. Is this the perfect recipe for designer babies?
Posthuma urges caution here, and says this conclusion is far afield from the actual state of the research.
Lets say you wanted to design a human with superior intelligence. Could you just select the right variants of the 52 intelligence genes, and wham-o, we have our next Einstein?
No. Genetics is so, so much more complicated than that.
For one, there could be thousands of genes that influence intelligence that have yet to be discovered. And they interact with each other in unpredictable ways. A gene that increases your smarts could also increase your risk for schizophrenia. Or change some other trait slightly. There are trade-offs and feedback loops everywhere you look in the genome.
If you would have to start constructing a human being from scratch, and you would have to build in all these little effects, I think we wouldn't be able to do that, Posthuma says. It's very difficult to understand the dynamics.
There are about 20,000 human genes, made up of around 3 billion base pairs. We will never be able to fully predict how a person will turn out based on the DNA, she says. Its just too intricate, too complicated, and also influenced heavily by our environment.
So you could have a very high liability for depression, but it will only happen if you go through a divorce, she says. And who can predict that?
And, Posthuma cautions, there are some things that genome-wide studies cant do. They cant, for instance, find very, very rare gene variations. (Think about it: If one person in 50,000 has a gene that causes a disease, its just going to look like noise.) For schizophrenia, she says, we know that there's some [gene] variants that decrease or increase your risk of schizophrenia 20-fold, but they're very rare in the population.
And they cant be used to make generalizations about differences between large groups of people.
Last year, I interviewed Paul Glimcher, a New York University social scientist whose research floored me. Glimcher plans to recruit 10,000 New Yorkers and track everything about them for decades. Everything: full genome data, medical records, diet, credit card transactions, physical activity, personality test scores, you name it. The idea, he says, is to create a dense, longitudinal database of human life that machine learning programs can mine for insights. Its possible this approach will elucidate the complex interactions of genetics, behavior, and environment that put us at risk for diseases like Alzheimers.
Computer science and biology are converging to make these audacious projects easier. And to some degree, the results of these projects may help us align our genes and our environments for optimal well-being.
Again, Posthuma cautions: Not all the predictions this research makes will be meaningful.
Do we care if we find a gene that only increases our height or our BMI or our intelligence with less than 0.0001 percent? she asks. It doesn't have any clinical relevance. But it will aid our scientific understanding of how intellect arises nonetheless.
And thats the bottom line. The scientists doing this work arent in it to become fortune tellers. Theyre in it to understand basic science.
What most people focus on, when they hear about genes for IQ, they say: Oh, no. You can look at my DNA. You can tell me what my IQ score will be, Posthuma says. They probably dont know its much better if you just take the IQ test. Much faster.
Read the original post:
Scientists are finding more genes linked to IQ. This doesn't mean we can predict intelligence. - Vox
SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER
Bruce Goldman, a science writer for Stanford University Medical Schools Office of Communication & Public Affairs, wrote about the sex-based cognitive differences in the Spring 2017 edition ofStanford Medicine magazine. In a June5 blog post, Goldman highlighted the findings of research on the different ways male and female brains function.
Progressives have been somewhat successful in convincing the public that the Democratic Party is the party of science. But research into sex-based cognitive differences seriously brings this into question by confirming that the human mind does, in fact, have static and innate properties that influence behavior.
Consider Harvard professor Steven Pinkers 2002 book,The Blank Slate. Pinker, who is politically moderate, argues that the denial of innate human instincts runs deep and pervasive in modern society, despite significant scientific that the mind has static properties that shape our behaviors. The mind isnt a blank slate waiting to be shaped by society, Pinker argues.
The denial of human nature has spread beyond the academy and has led to a disconnect betweenintellectual life and common sense. I first had the idea of writing this book when I started acollection of astonishing claims from pundits and social critics about the malleability of thehuman psyche: that little boys quarrel and fight because they are encouraged to do so; thatchildren enjoy sweets because their parents use them as a reward for eating vegetables; thatteenagers get the idea to compete in looks and fashion from spelling bees and academic prizes;that men think the goal of sex is an orgasm because of the way they were socialized. Theproblem is not just that these claims are preposterous but that the writers did not acknowledgethey were saying things that common sense might call into question. This is the mentality of acult, in which fantastical beliefs are flaunted as proof of ones piety.
Goldman points to research on rhesus monkeys, which revealed that to a significant degree that there are real differences in the wiring of male and female brains. In the study, male monkeys strongly preferred toys with wheels, while female monkeys gravitated towards soft, plush, toys. Goldman argues that because these monkeys werent molded by their parents or simian society to enjoy specific toys, their interests were shaped, in part, by the gendered nature of their brains.
NiraoShah, a Stanford professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences and of neurobiology, argues Theyre innate rather than learned at least in animals so the circuitry involved ought to be developmentally hard-wired into the brain. These circuits should differ depending on which sex youre looking at.
Diane Halpern, the former President of the American Psychological Association, admits that she originally believed in the blank slate understanding of the human mind. But after reviewing a pile of journal articles that stood several feet high and numerous books and book chapters that dwarfed the stack of journal articles she changed her mind. Halpern was largely swayed by the research on the rhesus monkeys and another study on boys and girls age 9 to 17 months old, which revealed them to have differences in their preference for stereotypically male versus stereotypically female toyseven though they had yet toachieve a socialized understanding of gender as it pertains to American society.
Halpern claims that many sex-based cognitive differences are visible within 2 and 3-month-old infants. She cites a research example that concluded that infant girls respond more readily to faces and begin talking earlier than do their male counterparts.
Infant girls respond more readily to faces and begin talking earlier. Boys react earlier in infancy to experimentally induced perceptual discrepancies in their visual environment. In adulthood, women remain more oriented to faces, men to things.
The blind adherence to the blank slate runs pervasively throughout the progressive ideology. Young boys are often treated like defective girls when they have a harder time sitting still in class. Gender theorists in academia promote the notion of non-binary genders based upon the belief that the concepts of male and female are almost entirely socially constructed. Left-leaning economists promote policies such as the $15 minimum wage and widespread redistribution efforts because human self-interest is merely a reflection of Americans capitalistic society, rather than innate instincts.
Consider the words of Mao, whose belief in the infinite malleability of the human psyche led him to construct a totalitarian society that claimed 45 million lives: A blank sheet of paper has no blotches, and so the newest and most beautiful words can be written on it, the newest and most beautiful pictures can be painted on it.
Pinker argues that a belief in the blank slate has already done harm to the lives of Americans. He cites several examples, including cruel parenting regimes that resulted from the belief that parents could mold their children like clay. He argues that it has distorted the choices faced by mothers as they chose between raising their children full time or entering the workforce. Finally, he cites the reigns of totalitarian states, like Maos China, which inflicted horrors upon their citizens based on faulty understandings of the human mind.
Visit link:
Stanford Research on Sex Differences Reveals a Leftist Rejection of ... - Breitbart News
Exactly when does old age begin? Which health markers best predict who will live a long and healthy life versus a life spent in poor health?
Developing metrics to help answer these questions and to understand the tradeoffs between lifespan and health span is the subject of a recent paper by MDI Biological Laboratory scientists in Journals of Gerontology: Biological Sciences, a publication of the Gerontological Society of America.
The authors studied various parameters of health in short-lived strains of the roundworm, C. elegans, with the goal of developing an empirical definition of the onset of old age, and of teasing out which health markers are most predictive of a long and healthy life.
With the development of new genetics tools, scientists are getting closer to developing therapies to extend human lifespan, but the effect of such therapies on health span (the proportion of life spent in good health) is unclear. While it used to be thought that therapies to extend lifespan would also extend health span, new research is showing that may not always be true.
The growing number of anti-aging therapies on the horizon creates a need for the development of new parameters to assess healthy aging. Instead of striving to only to prolong longevity, as has been the case in the past, the use of such tools will allow scientists to focus their efforts on lifespan-enhancing therapies with the greatest positive effects on health.
All anti-aging interventions arent created equal, said post-doctoral researcher Jarod Rollins, Ph.D., one of the studys lead investigators. A recent study in C. elegans found, for instance, that the proportion of life spent in a frail state is longer in long-lived mutants than in wild-type animals. Our research is aimed at developing tools to help scientists assess the effect of lifespan-enhancing interventions on health span.
The molecular mechanisms of aging are a focus of research at the MDI Biological Laboratory, located in Bar Harbor, Maine, which is pioneering new approaches to regenerative medicine focused on the development of drugs to increase healthy lifespan by enhancing the bodys innate ability to repair and regenerate lost or damaged tissues and organs.
Rollins works in the laboratory of Aric Rogers, Ph.D., the lead author of the study, in the institutions Kathryn W. Davis Center for Regenerative Biology and Medicine.
C. elegans is a popular model in aging research because its short lifespan of only two to three weeks allows scientists to quickly assess the effects of anti-aging interventions, including genetic manipulation and drug therapies. The tiny, soil-dwelling roundworm also has other advantages for research: it shares many of its genes with humans and its health markers roughly correspond to those in humans.
One marker that the MDI Biological Laboratory scientists found to be predictive of a healthy lifespan in C. elegans was movement speed. Movement speed corresponds to walking speed in humans, which studies have found to be an accurate predictor of longevity. One of the scientists next steps will be to further develop movement speed as a marker for assessing the effect of anti-aging interventions in C. elegans.
As science closes in on the mechanisms underlying aging, the tradeoffs between lifespan and health span become a greater cause for concern, said Kevin Strange, Ph.D., president of the MDI Biological Laboratory. The scientists in the Rogers laboratory are at the forefront of developing metrics to assess the impact of anti-aging interventions on quality of life.
Go here to see the original:
Living long and living well: Is it possible to do both? - ScienceBlog.com (blog)
MONDAY, June 5, 2017 (HealthDay News) -- Two drugs that target genetic flaws are giving people with specific types of advanced lung cancer a chance to live longer and better, a pair of new clinical trials finds.
A newly approved drug called alectinib (Alecensa) works twice as long as the current standard medication in halting cancer growth in patients with ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer, results from a new global clinical trial show.
ALK is a gene that produces a protein that helps cancer cells grow and spread, according to the American Cancer Society (ACS).
In another study, an experimental drug called dacomitinib delayed cancer growth by about half in non-small cell lung cancer patients who had a mutation of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) that caused cancer cells to grow faster, a second trial reported. Non-small cell lung cancers comprise most lung cancer cases.
EGFR is a substance normally found on cells that helps them grow and divide, the ACS says.
The drugs, alectinib in particular, will let people live months or years longer just by taking a daily pill, said Dr. Bruce Johnson, chief clinical research officer at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston. Johnson is also incoming president of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO).
Alectinib works more than a year longer than crizotinib (Xalkori), which itself supplanted chemotherapy a few years back because it proved more effective with fewer side effects, Johnson said.
"This is kind of a game changer, because the drug itself works at least for two years, plus there are other treatments" that can be substituted when it ultimately becomes ineffective, Johnson said of alectinib. "We used to have to tell these patients 10 or 15 years ago that you've got eight months to a year. Now they most likely have years."
Both of these genetically driven forms of lung cancer are more common in nonsmokers, the ACS says.
The studies were both funded by the drug manufacturers. Hoffmann-La Roche funded the alectinib study. Pfizer and SFJ Pharmaceuticals Group funded the dacomitinib study.
The first clinical trial revealed that alectinib halts lung cancer growth for about 26 months on average. That compared to about 10 months on average for crizotinib, the drug now used as front-line treatment for ALK-positive patients.
Alectinib also works 84 percent better than crizotinib at preventing spread of advanced lung cancer to the brain, because it is better able to penetrate into the brain and kill cancer cells there, said lead researcher Dr. Alice Shaw, director of thoracic oncology at Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center in Boston.
About 5 percent of non-small cell lung cancer cases are ALK-positive. That means they have a genetically abnormal protein that fuels cancer growth. In the United States, about 12,500 people are diagnosed with ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer each year, researchers said in background information.
Alectinib already is approved in the United States as a treatment for ALK-positive patients who no longer respond to crizotinib, Shaw said.
The results should "establish alectinib as the new standard of care" for ALK-positive lung cancer patients, rather than crizotinib, Shaw said.
ASCO expert Dr. John Heymach agreed, calling the clinical trial a "watershed moment."
Not only did the drug work better and longer, but it also produced fewer side effects in patients, noted Heymach, chair of thoracic/head and neck oncology for the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.
The most common side effects for alectinib were fatigue, constipation, muscle aches and swelling, while crizotinib patients most often suffered from gastrointestinal problems and liver enzyme abnormalities, according to the researchers.
The second clinical trial compared a new drug, dacomitinib, to the current standard targeted drug gefitinib (Iressa) in treating EGFR-positive lung cancer.
Each year about 15,000 people in the United States are diagnosed with EGFR-positive lung cancer, which involve mutations that increase the growth of cancer cells, researchers said in background notes.
Dacomitinib blocked EGFR mutations more effectively than first-generation drug gefitinib, providing a 41 percent lower chance of cancer progression or death, researchers found. On average, dacomitinib halted cancer growth for 14.7 months in patients, compared with 9.2 months with gefitinib.
"From the perspective of doctors who treat lung cancer daily, this is really a substantial advance," Heymach said, noting that the results put the drug "at the front of the pack in terms of efficacy."
However, dacomitinib also created more side effects, including acne in about 14 percent of patients and diarrhea in 8 percent of patients. Doctors wound up reducing the dosage in about 66 percent of patients as a result of side effects, said lead researcher Dr. Tony Mok, chair of clinical oncology at the Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Heymach said the side effects are "not life-threatening toxicities."
"These are toxicities that doctors who treat this for a living become accustomed to managing," Heymach said.
"At the end of the day, I think we now have one additional choice" in treating EGRF-positive non-small cell lung cancer, Mok concluded, adding that dacomitinib should be considered as a new first-line alternative treatment. The drug has not received FDA approval.
Neither of the tested drugs will be cheap. "Almost all these targeted drugs are thousands of dollars per month," Johnson said.
The results of both trials were scheduled to be presented Monday at ASCO's annual meeting, in Chicago. The findings were also being published June 6 in the New England Journal of Medicine.
See the original post:
Gene-Targeted Drugs Fight Advanced Lung Cancers - Montana Standard