[scifinoir2] NYTimes.com: A Rush of Stories
This page was sent to you by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Katrina survivors tell their horrifying stories. OPINION | September 12, 2005 Op-Ed Columnist: A Rush of Stories By BOB HERBERT The stories continue to come out of New Orleans in an awful rush, like blood from a sudden gaping wound. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/12/opinion/12herbert.html?ex=1127275200en=596d0f8f701b5dc5ei=5070emc=eta1 -- ABOUT THIS E-MAIL This e-mail was sent to you by a friend through NYTimes.com's E-mail This Article service. For general information about NYTimes.com, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] NYTimes.com 500 Seventh Avenue New York, NY 10018 Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/LRMolB/TM ~- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[scifinoir2] Analyzing the Circuitry of Stem Cells
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Fascinating, complicated biological science stuff. September 13, 2005 Analyzing the Circuitry of Stem Cells By NICHOLAS WADE How are the 25,000 genes of a human cell controlled and orchestrated? How does a stem cell in the embryo develop into a mature cell of the brain or heart or liver? A possibly deep insight into all these questions has been gained by mapping the top-level circuitry that controls the human embryonic stem cell. Scientists at the Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Mass., have developed a technique for uncovering the interactions of transcription factors. These are the agents that switch genes on or off in the cell. By figuring out these interactions on a genomewide scale, they have reconstructed the top level of the controls that govern a human embryonic stem cell. The discovery is a starting point for addressing the next question, that of how an embryonic stem cell commits itself to a specific fate, like becoming a cell of the brain or liver or pancreas gland. Biologists have long understood the lowest level of gene control. In front of most genes is a sequence of DNA known as a promoter region. When the right transcription factor, a protein, lands on the promoter, the DNA of the gene is transcribed into RNA. This is the first step in generating whatever protein the gene specifies. But that has left wide open the question of the higher levels of control. The cell has not one but 25,000 genes to deal with. In each type of cell, a majority of these genes must be kept permanently switched off since their products would interfere with the cell's specific role. Other genes must respond instantly to signals arriving from the outside environment. This requires a higher level of control. But given that the cell has no central management or computer, where does this higher level of control reside? Richard Young, a Whitehead Institute biologist, investigated this question. Starting with yeast, he found three years ago that many of the yeast cell's transcription factors act on the promoters that control other transcription factor genes. This interaction between transcription factors seemed to serve as the cell's higher level control system. He has now applied the technique to human cells, starting with embryonic stem cells. The cells, he and colleagues say in the current issue of Cell, are controlled by a triumvirate of three transcription factors, known as oct4, sox2 and nanog. The three factors interact with one another to maintain joint activity. They also control a large set of promoter sites that govern genes involved in the cell's major developmental pathways. The control is exerted jointly to a surprising extent, since two or sometimes three members of the triumvirate are required at the promoter sites. They do not turn genes on, however; they keep them inactive. They inhibit genes that lead to the embryo's first developmental steps, the formation of the endoderm, mesoderm and ectoderm layers of tissue, as well as other major pathways. Geneticists have established that oct4, a characteristic ingredient of embryonic cells, disappears completely from cells that have started to develop. Dr. Young says he believes that the repressive controls exerted by the oct4 troika must somehow remain in place, even after the troika has been retired, on all but one of the main developmental paths, depending on which cues a cell is receiving from its environment. It is not clear how oct4 is activated in the first place. On its promoter site the Whitehead team could see only the fingerprints of sox2 and nanog, the other members of the triumvirate. Perhaps the egg produces some factor that jumpstarts oct4 production, Dr. Young said. Discovery of such a factor would be of great interest because it could provide an easy way of reprogramming a mature human cell back to the embryonic state. Dr. Young said he planned to study the new circuitry that may be invoked as an embryonic stem cell makes the transition to a nerve cell. Presumably oct4 and partners will be eliminated from the cell, and other regulators will come along to create a new gene expression program, he said. Michael Snyder, a biologist at Yale, said the new report provided the first glimpse of the regulatory circuit of an embryonic stem cell. Nobody has done global mapping on an embryonic stem cell so this is fairly groundbreaking in that sense, he said. It's a great first start but the results need to be confirmed. Genes and control sites used to be studied one by one. Since 2003, the decoding of the human genome has made it possible to study all such elements at the same time. This requires vast scaling up by laboratories. But systems biologists, as many in this new field call themselves, believe that analysis on a genomewide basis is the only way to understand the operation of
[scifinoir2] 'Racist' police blocked bridge and forced evacuees back at gunpoint
Saw this on CNN last night 'Racist' police blocked bridge and forced evacuees back at gunpoint By Andrew Buncombe in Washington Published: 11 September 2005 A Louisiana police chief has admitted that he ordered his officers to block a bridge over the Mississippi river and force escaping evacuees back into the chaos and danger of New Orleans. Witnesses said the officers fired their guns above the heads of the terrified people to drive them back and protect their own suburbs. Two paramedics who were attending a conference in the city and then stayed to help those affected by the hurricane, said the officers told them they did not want their community becoming another New Orleans. The desperate evacuees were forced to trudge back into the city they had just left. It was a real eye-opener, Larry Bradshaw, 49, a paramedic from San Francisco, told The Independent on Sunday. I believe it was racism. It was callousness, it was cruelty. Mr Bradshaw said the police blocked off the road on the Thursday and Friday after Hurricane Katrina struck on Monday 29 August. He and his wife Lorrie Slonsky, also a paramedic, had sheltered with others in the Hotel Monteleone in the French Quarter. When food and water ran out they were forced to head for the city's convention centre, but on the way they heard reports of the chaos and violence that was taking place there and inside the Superdome where thousands of people were forced together without running water, toilets, electricity or air conditioning. So Mr Bradshaw spoke with a senior New Orleans police officer who instructed them to cross the Crescent City Connection bridge to Jefferson Parish, where he promised they would find buses waiting to evacuate them. They were in the middle of a group of up to 800 people - overwhelmingly black - walking across the bridge when they heard shots and saw people running. We had been hearing shooting for days. What was different about this was that it was close by, he said. Making their way towards the crest of the bridge they saw a chain of armed police officers blocking the route. When they asked about the buses they were told their was no such arrangement and that the route was being blocked to avoid their parish becoming another New Orleans. They identified the police as officers from the city of Gretna. The following day Mr Bradshaw said they tried again to cross and directly witnessed police shooting over the heads of a middle-aged white couple who were also turned back. Eventually, late on Friday evening, the couple succeeded in crossing the bridge with the intervention of a contact in the local fire department. Arthur Lawson, chief of the Gretna police department, said he had not yet questioned his officers as to whether they fired their guns. He confirmed that his officers, along with those from Jefferson Parish and the Crescent City Connection police force, sealed the bridge and refused to let people pass. This was despite the fact that local media were informing people that the bridge was one of the few safe evacuation routes from the city. Gretna is a predominantly white suburban town of around 18,000 inhabitants. In the aftermath of Katrina, three quarters of the inhabitants still had electricity and running water. But, Chief Lawson told UPI news agency: There was no food, water or shelter in Gretna City. We did not have the wherewithal to deal with these people. If we had opened the bridge our city would have looked like New Orleans does now - looted, burned and pillaged. Mr Bradshaw and his wife were evacuated to Texas and have since returned to California. They condemned the authorities, adding: This official treatment was in sharp contrast to the warm, heartfelt reception given to us by ordinary Texans. Throughout, the official relief effort was callous, inept and racist... Lives were lost that did not need to be lost. A Louisiana police chief has admitted that he ordered his officers to block a bridge over the Mississippi river and force escaping evacuees back into the chaos and danger of New Orleans. Witnesses said the officers fired their guns above the heads of the terrified people to drive them back and protect their own suburbs. Two paramedics who were attending a conference in the city and then stayed to help those affected by the hurricane, said the officers told them they did not want their community becoming another New Orleans. The desperate evacuees were forced to trudge back into the city they had just left. It was a real eye-opener, Larry Bradshaw, 49, a paramedic from San Francisco, told The Independent on Sunday. I believe it was racism. It was callousness, it was cruelty. Mr Bradshaw said the police blocked off the road on the Thursday and Friday after Hurricane Katrina struck on Monday 29 August. He and his wife Lorrie Slonsky, also a paramedic, had sheltered with others in the Hotel Monteleone in the French Quarter.
[scifinoir2] Is America Stable?
This article approaches a nearly complete situational analysis. All that's left out is the central role of racism as the solvent that has always prevented America from cohering into a social whole. White inability to come to grips with the intractable psychopathology of racism and the structural damage it has done and that it continues to do to the social promise of America is the sine qua non. XM Disasters such as Hurricane Katrina often serve as a kind of political Rorschach blotter for a given society. American politicians, pundits, and activists stared at the horrifying images and conjured up explanations that are more a product of their own political psychology than anything existing in actual reality. Indeed, many succumbed to the almost uncontrollable urge to jump up and shout Aha! See? Didn't I tell you this would happen? If everyone would have only listened to me, then this tragedy could have been avoided! Thus, as the images from New Orleans flood our collective psyche, one hears liberals claim that the events prove the need for yet more spending on inner city programs and the evils of tax cuts for the rich. The campus PC crowd sees vindication for their belief that America is indistinguishable from apartheid South Africa, and the racialist right sees irrefutable confirmation of their own anthropological theories. Being a libertarian, it shouldn't surprise anyone that my political interpretation of the tragedy revolves around the horrific failure of government at all levels. The feds were immersed in bureaucratic torpor, the governor of Louisiana was pathetically vacuous, and the mayor of New Orleans was an incompetent boob. If this incident doesn't demonstrate to everyone the sheer folly of relying on the government (as opposed to one's own initiative) in adverse circumstances, then I don't know what will. There was so much mindless waffling from our leaders that, in my humble opinion, this storm should be officially renamed Hurricane Hamlet. While I admit to my biases, I think that this libertarian interpretation is backed up by more tangible facts than any of the others, but I have steadfastly resisted plunging into the morass of just such an analysis because I think that this tragedy has potentially much greater philosophical and political implications. As I watched my old neighborhood in New Orleans become a watery death trap, and as I saw footage of former medical colleagues dodging sniper's bullets and fending off bands of armed looters inside their hospitals, I began to ponder the big picture. How can a sophisticated American city suffer a civilizational melt-down so quickly? Would a similar melt-down occur in other societies under the same circumstances? If not, why did it happen in New Orleans? These are the questions with which all thinking Americans must now struggle. Although mindful of my own Rorschachian shortcomings, I contend that this tragedy exposes some of the underlying destabilizing forces that lurk just below the surface of our increasingly polyglot empire. In a stable society comprised of largely contented and self-sufficient citizens, this hurricane would have had a very different outcome indeed. The survivors would have displayed teamwork, discipline, and numerous acts of heroism. While some of these traits were present in New Orleans, there was also a great deal of looting, rape, and murder. Obviously, there is quite a bit of hatred boiling in various corners of America, and that hatred is directed at rival ethnic groups, at the authorities, and at the norms and customs of our heretofore dominant culture. Most poignantly, what do these events say about the future of our imperial project? What does the future hold for such a society built on multiculturalism, overseas military conquests, and ever-expanding government expenditures? Obviously, America has deep and gradually widening divisions which were exposed during the course of Hurricane Katrina. Furthermore, I contend that there are forces afoot in our society that make a repeat of the mayhem very likely A somewhat more salient question is this: since America apparently lacks the kind of esprit de corps and shared cultural values that would lend succor to a more coherent nation in times of distress, just what is keeping our society glued together in times of relative calm? The very question of American instability might seem farfetched to most observers. After all, are we not the wealthiest nation in the world? Are we not the world's only remaining superpower? Who could possibly doubt our political stability? Nevertheless, the events in New Orleans raise questions that warrant careful examination. From my perspective, America is steadily losing the amity of shared cultural values that serve as the social glue in other, more normal societies. As a result, we are relying on three alternative forces to maintain stability. Ominously, I contend that these forces are each weakening due to
[scifinoir2] New shows premiering tonight
Two new shows are premiering tonight. First is Bones (8 pm EST on Fox), about a forensic anthropologist who assists an FBI agent (played by Angel star David Boreanaz) solve cases. Early reviews I've read say it's formulaic (the genre's getting crowded) but has decent leads. Next up is Supernatural, about two brothers (one of whom is Smallville star Jensen Ackles) who travel around dispatching supernatural baddies as they search for their missing father. Critics have given this show good press, saying it's genuinely scary. Might be worth a look.The two shows represent the obvious continuing influence of other hits. In the case of Bones it's the whole investigative theme (CSI, Navy NCIS, Crossing Jordan, etc.) Supernatural is glomming on to the resurgence in, well, supernatural-themed shows like Medium and Lost (which may or may not be supernatural). [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/LRMolB/TM ~- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [scifinoir2] New shows premiering tonight--what did you think?
Anyone see these shows? Bones was indeed formulaic. The star is a lady whose parents disappeared when she was a teen, an event that of course shaped her life. She now solves crimes and chases down the bad guys to make sure others don't suffer as she did. She tries to be there for the victim because she thinks things might have been different had someone like her had been there when her parents disappeared, a co-worker sagely reveals. She's that typical driven-and-brilliant-cold-on-the-surface-but-caring-deep-down genius. Nothing special about her. Boreanaz plays the FBI agent with the square jaw and police skills who tends to have doubts about the value of big-brained lab types in the field. Brains don't solve cases, asking questions a thousand times solves cases, he growls at his new partner the squint--the cute name FBI agents evidently give forensic nerds who are always squinting at microscopes and test tubes and the like. He didn't stand out either. The investigative staff is the standard eclectic mix of young and eccentric folk. Again, typical nowadays. The only aspect of Bones I saw to differentiate it from the other investigative shows was their usage of holography to create an image of a murder victim from her bones. Other than that it didn't offer anything new. Since I'm not a big fan of the investigative genre, I'm not sure I'll keep watching it. Supernatural, on the other hand, was intriguing. The beginning is creepy, showing how the brothers are set on a path of hunting--seeking out and destroying evil ghosts and monsters. The show dealt with the Lady in White myth, a beautiful young woman betrayed in life by her man, who killed herself and whose ghost haunts backroads, killing unfaithful men who succumb to her. The show wasn't terrifying, but it had enough suspenseful moments to make me keep the lights on. The ending's a trip. I liked the stars, liked the writing and pacing, liked the seriousness with which it was done. Not sure if it'll end up being as good as the creepier episodes of The X-Files or Kolchak the Night Stalker at its scariest, but I'm definitely willing to stay with it for the season. Lots of good possibilites. Speaking of Kolchak, it will be interesting to see how Supernatural compares to the remake of The Night Stalker airing this season. Someone check out these shows and tell us what you think. I believe Supernatural will re-air this Thursday night. -Original Message- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Johnson Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 20:22 To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scifinoir2] New shows premiering tonight Two new shows are premiering tonight. First is Bones (8 pm EST on Fox), about a forensic anthropologist who assists an FBI agent (played by Angel star David Boreanaz) solve cases. Early reviews I've read say it's formulaic (the genre's getting crowded) but has decent leads. Next up is Supernatural, about two brothers (one of whom is Smallville star Jensen Ackles) who travel around dispatching supernatural baddies as they search for their missing father. Critics have given this show good press, saying it's genuinely scary. Might be worth a look.The two shows represent the obvious continuing influence of other hits. In the case of Bones it's the whole investigative theme (CSI, Navy NCIS, Crossing Jordan, etc.) Supernatural is glomming on to the resurgence in, well, supernatural-themed shows like Medium and Lost (which may or may not be supernatural). [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/LRMolB/TM ~- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [scifinoir2] New shows premiering tonight--what did you think?
Hmm...Sorry i missed the premieres...Bones sounds pretty interesting Keith Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Anyone see these shows? Bones was indeed formulaic. The star is a lady whose parents disappeared when she was a teen, an event that of course shaped her life. She now solves crimes and chases down the bad guys to make sure others don't suffer as she did. She tries to be there for the victim because she thinks things might have been different had someone like her had been there when her parents disappeared, a co-worker sagely reveals. She's that typical driven-and-brilliant-cold-on-the-surface-but-caring-deep-down genius. Nothing special about her. Boreanaz plays the FBI agent with the square jaw and police skills who tends to have doubts about the value of big-brained lab types in the field. Brains don't solve cases, asking questions a thousand times solves cases, he growls at his new partner the squint--the cute name FBI agents evidently give forensic nerds who are always squinting at microscopes and test tubes and the like. He didn't stand out either. The investigative staff is the standard eclectic mix of young and eccentric folk. Again, typical nowadays. The only aspect of Bones I saw to differentiate it from the other investigative shows was their usage of holography to create an image of a murder victim from her bones. Other than that it didn't offer anything new. Since I'm not a big fan of the investigative genre, I'm not sure I'll keep watching it. Supernatural, on the other hand, was intriguing. The beginning is creepy, showing how the brothers are set on a path of hunting--seeking out and destroying evil ghosts and monsters. The show dealt with the Lady in White myth, a beautiful young woman betrayed in life by her man, who killed herself and whose ghost haunts backroads, killing unfaithful men who succumb to her. The show wasn't terrifying, but it had enough suspenseful moments to make me keep the lights on. The ending's a trip. I liked the stars, liked the writing and pacing, liked the seriousness with which it was done. Not sure if it'll end up being as good as the creepier episodes of The X-Files or Kolchak the Night Stalker at its scariest, but I'm definitely willing to stay with it for the season. Lots of good possibilites. Speaking of Kolchak, it will be interesting to see how Supernatural compares to the remake of The Night Stalker airing this season. Someone check out these shows and tell us what you think. I believe Supernatural will re-air this Thursday night. -Original Message- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Johnson Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 20:22 To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scifinoir2] New shows premiering tonight Two new shows are premiering tonight. First is Bones (8 pm EST on Fox), about a forensic anthropologist who assists an FBI agent (played by Angel star David Boreanaz) solve cases. Early reviews I've read say it's formulaic (the genre's getting crowded) but has decent leads. Next up is Supernatural, about two brothers (one of whom is Smallville star Jensen Ackles) who travel around dispatching supernatural baddies as they search for their missing father. Critics have given this show good press, saying it's genuinely scary. Might be worth a look.The two shows represent the obvious continuing influence of other hits. In the case of Bones it's the whole investigative theme (CSI, Navy NCIS, Crossing Jordan, etc.) Supernatural is glomming on to the resurgence in, well, supernatural-themed shows like Medium and Lost (which may or may not be supernatural). [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] - YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group scifinoir2 on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. - - Yahoo! for Good Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/LRMolB/TM ~- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
