The History of Smallpox, Using it as A Weapon, Development The First Vaccine, and The Invention of The Bifurcated Vaccination Needle

By: Patience Elett...Enjoy :)

< The Bifurcated Needle Today

 < The Bifurcated Needle Then

 < Edward Jenner

 < Benjamin A. Rubin


http://www.questiaschool.com/read < Cross Section of the Smallpox Virus

I. Introduction

Smallpox was an epidemic that was highly contagious and deadly. It left pock marks all over your body for the rest of your life; if you were lucky to survive.  It was also used as a weapon in wars. To this day there is no cure, although Edward Jenner discovered the first vaccine. Jenner realized that the old housewife’s tale seemed to have some truth to it. The rumor was that milk maids never got small pox.  He decided to find out whether or not it was correct. He designed an experiment, tested it, and in turn discovered the first vaccine to ever be introduced to the world. Of course, it’s easier and cleaner to use a needle for vaccinations than using a knife like Jenner. So Benjamin A. Rubin invented the Bifurcated Needle which was used to administer the smallpox vaccination.

II. History of Smallpox

THE HISTORY OF THE ERADICATION OF SMALLPOX

4000 B.C.          Smallpox originates in Asia or Africa

1157 B.C.          Pharaoh Ramses V dies of s.p. (smallpox)

910 A.D.            Clinical profile first described by Rhazes

1096-1291         Crusaders bring smallpox back to Europe

1400-1800         European fatalities routinely in excess of 500,000 per year

1520                  Aztec empire collapses

1723                  Variolation introduced to Europe

1763                  First use of s.m. as a bioweapon (against native American Indians)

1796                  Vaccination introduced by E. Jenner

1840                  Variolation outlawed in Europe

1950                  Freeze-dried viccinia developed

1967                  WHO-intensified eradication program initiated

1977                  Last natural case of s.p. (Somalia)

1993                  Variola DNA genomes sequenced

1999                  IOM report reccomends further research into variola virus (United States)

2001                  United States announces that the CDC's variola stock will be retained

2002                  WHO recommends postponement of destruction of variola virus stock

*note: the advances in s.p. treatment and vaccines coincided.

a.    Early Epidemics

Before the mid-twentieth century, Smallpox was one of the most horrific diseases. Even if you were lucky enough to survive, your entire face and body would be forever scarred with pockmarks. It was tremendously communicable between humans; it was also one of the deadliest diseases that existed (before it was eradicated). Essentially undefeatable smallpox plagues go back several thousands of years in history. Smallpox enveloped china, Mesopotamia, and the Roman Empire in ancient times. There are records about a smallpox-like disease from the Indian subcontinent, dating around 1500 B.C.

b.   Eradication Program

The poxvirus is very host-specific, and its only residence was the human being.  Knowing this information, immunologists got together and set up a worldwide organization to flat out delete the smallpox virus. The only things they needed in order to complete this goal were a large supply of effective vaccine and numerous field workers. They started working towards this huge goal by isolation and prevention. If any smallpox was spotted, they would take everyone who was or could be infected, and isolate them in different rooms. They would also prevent smallpox by vaccinating everyone near and outbreak of the variola virus (smallpox).  By 1977, it appeared that they had completed their goal, but it wasn’t until 1980 that the World Health Assembly and WHO announced that it had successfully been erased.

 

c.    Remaining Stocks

   No new cases have been brought into view since then; although the United States and the Soviet Union kept supplies of smallpox for military, defense, and research purposes. No one knows whether or not these supplies have been raided or have leaked to other countries and organizations; terrorist groups being among them. Taking into consideration that most people have not been vaccinated against smallpox for more than a quarter of a century, it is conceivable that if the virus were to leak out again; then the aftermath would be more catastrophic than the original outbreaks.

d.   Variolation

Variolation is a method of preventing the full effects of smallpox; if you were to obtain any. In this process, you take a scab from an infected person and either instill it into the nasal passages; or get it injected into your skin. 1% of these people would get severe infections and die.

e.    Molecular Biology

I.                  The Smallpox Genome

The brick-shaped virions of the smallpox virus can be seen by light microscopy because they are bigger than many bacteria. The pathogen becomes active after it is inside the cell and lost enough of the viral envelope to allow genetic material to be transcribed and translated.  The Virion is made up of four main parts: core, lateral bodies, outer membrane, + envelope; which is broken down once the Virion gets inside the cell. Disulfide proteins allegedly hold together the outer membrane. The core membrane is what holds the viral deoxyribonucleic acid. The genome is ranked one of the longest viral genomes and is made of a single, linear, double-stranded section of DNA. Genes located within the center of the genome execute fundamental functions; including transcription and replication.

II.               The Infectious Agent

Externally enveloped virions (EEVs) and cell-associated enveloped virions (CEVs) are very important for variola to spread to other cells of the human. EEVs enter cells by using endocytosis. CEVs control efficient cell-to-cell spreading to close by cells; EEVs control transmissions over a long range.

f.     Types of Smallpox

I.                  Ordinary-Type

With this type of infection, the incubation period can be from 7-19 days. Most cases need 11-14 days after exposure until symptoms are obvious. The first symptom is an abrupt fever of 38.5-40.5 C. other symptoms include splitting headaches, severe backaches, and rarely convulsions and delirium. 50% have nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. Many doctors misdiagnose the early stage as appendicitis.  After fever, the eruptive phase starts. The eruptive phase consists of lesions, rashes, and most likely, death.

II.               Modified-Type

Modified type is the same thing as ordinary type, with the exception that the symptoms happen and show faster. Modified also tends to cause less lesions than ordinary type. Scabbing is complete within 11 days. There have not been any recorded deaths caused by modified type smallpox.

III.           Flat-Type

No raised legions

IV.           Hemorrhagic-Type

Most deadly form of smallpox; but most people don’t die from the loss of blood they die from heart failure mostly.

III. Weaponization of Smallpox

In the beginning, armies would be sent out wearing smallpox infected clothes; in order to contaminate the enemy. Now in modern times when smallpox and wars were raging allover the world, they would send out a suicide contaminist. Much like the kind of idea we have developed today for suicide bombers.

IV. Discovery and Development of the Vaccine + Edward Jenner Biography

Today, we have vaccinations of many colors, measures, inventions, sizes, and cures. But where did it all start? It started with a simple observation. Something you or I could have noticed. Edward Jenner was born Berkeley, England. He was the 3^rd son and the youngest of all six children of Stephen Jenner; a clergyman of the Church of England.  He became an orphan boy at the tender age of five and was raised by his clergy brother. At thirteen, he was apprenticed to a surgeon. In 1770, he moved to London, England to work with John Hunter; a beginning Scottish anatomist and surgeon. Jenner didn’t feel quite at home in London, so he moved back to Berkeley in his mid twenties. He made himself known as a local doctor. He spent free time traveling the countryside and drinking with friends.

Edward Jenner was still a teenager in an apprenticeship to Daniel Ludlow when he first heard an old wife’s tale about smallpox from one of Gloucestershire’s milkmaids. The story goes that milkmaids never need fear smallpox if they’ve caught cowpox. This tale intrigued young Jenner. He was determined to investigate. In May 1796, he treated a milkmaid, Sarah Nelmes, for cowpox. May 14^th, 1796, he got approval from an 8 year old boy’s parents to use the child for an experiment. The child’s name was James Phipps. Jenner scratched James’s arm twice with a knife, then took some pus from the cowpox legion on Sarah’s hand; and then smeared it on the cuts. They waited a week, James got a little bit sick; and then was fine after 24 hours. About a month later Jenner cut James twice again, then smeared pus from a smallpox infected man on the cuts. James developed blisters at the cuts, but no other signs of smallpox. Thus; the first vaccination was made.

He was rejected for his paper. He tried again and personally published it.  

VI. Bifurcated Needle and Benjamin A. Rubin Biography

Benjamin A. Rubin was a microbiologist born in New York City in 1917. At that time, smallpox was killing more than 2 million people a year. He received his B.S. in biology-chemistry from the College of the City of New York, his M.S. in biology from Virginia Polytechnic Institute, and in 1947, his Ph.D. in microbiology from Yale. Post-grad, he worked for tons of labs and universities before getting a job at Wyeth Laboratories; which was where he began experimenting with needles. In 1965, he began working on what he would be most famous for; the bifurcated vaccination needle. He made this needle by grinding down the eyelet of a regular sewing machine needle. His discovery made vaccinations a lot cheaper and easily accessed, especially for people in underprivileged parts of the world. This needle worked by dipping it into the vaccine, making sure the drop of vaccine is in between the two prongs; and repeatedly poking it on the arm of the patient.

VII. Journal Article Review

There are three sections to my journal article. Each one is professionally written by Edward Jenner himself. The first section is called An Inquiry Into the Causes and Effects of the Variola Vaccine, or Cow-pox. 1798. The second section is titled Further Observations on the Variola Vaccine, or Cow-pox. 1799. The third is a continuation of Facts and Observations Relative to the Variola Vaccine, or Cow-pox. 1800. Each section talks about all the trials that Jenner has done. Section three is a little bit different than the other two sections though. It talks about how he’s done trials of more than 6,000 people. He talks about his feelings during the numerous trials. He also talks about how his patients felt and some direct quotes from them as well as people of higher rank than Jenner.

VIII. References

• Jenner, E. (1798). The three original publications on vaccination against smallpox. Harvard Classics, 38(4), Retrieved from http://www.bartleby.com/38/4/

                                               

• Adler, R. E. (2004). Medical Firsts: From Hippocrates to the Human Genome. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Retrieved October 14, 2010, from Questia database: http://www.questiaschool.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=107370949

• Zubay, G. (2005). Agents of Bioterrorism: Pathogens and Their Weaponization. New York: Columbia University Press. Retrieved October 14, 2010, from Questia database: http://www.questiaschool.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=111721807

• worcesterjonny, Initials (Director). (2009, February, 24). Edward Jenner-smallpox vaccine [Television series episode]. (Executive producer), YouTube.

• Invent Now-Hall of Fame, Initials. (2000). Benjamin a. Rubin. Retrieved from http://www.invent.org/hall_of_fame/125.html

• Inventor of the Week Archive, Initials. (2001, March). Inventor of the week archive. Retrieved from http://web.mit.edu/invent/iow/rubin.html

       

Robotic Surgery- Kelly Riebesell

I. Introduction
       To be considered a robot in the industrial setting, a piece of equipment needs to be programmable.  The technician has to be able to teach the robot new things and able to leave it unsupervised while the robot performs those tasks.  The definition of a robot becomes a very broad topic when it includes forms of remote control by a human operator.  In the last few years, robots have been applied in a variety or clinical procedures.
II. Discovery
        Up until recently, the only options for surgery have been the traditional operation, which requires a large incision, and laparoscopy, which uses a small incision but is limited to very simple procedures.  Now, with the use of the da Vinci surgical system, surgeons are able to offer a minimally evasive option for even the most complex surgical procedures.
         With the da Vinci surgery, a robot is not placed at the controls; but the robotic surgeons sit at the console of the da Vinci surgical system while the robot's camera and surgical instruments are placed into ports inserted through a few small punctures.  The robot's binocular eye-piece lense provides a 3-D view inside the patient, and up to 15 times magnification.  The surgeon controls pencil-sized instruments on the robotic arms- each with a tiny wrist-like joint.  A specialized computer program translates the
movements at the controls into precise micro-movements.
          There are currently three types of robotic surgery systems: Supervisory-Controlled Systems, Telesurgical Systems, and Shared Control Systems.  In the Supervisory-Controlled System, the surgeon first does any prep work needed, he inputs the data in the robotic system, plans course of action, takes x-rays, tests the robot's motions, places the robot in an appropriate position, and watches the robot do the procedure to make sure everything goes as planned. The Telesurgical System is the second type of device used in modern robotic surgery.  The most common variety of this system, the da Vinci Robotic Surgical System, as stated earlier, enhances the surgery by providing a 3-D visualization within hard-to-reach places like the heart.  It also enhances the control of tiny instruments.  This advancement in technology allows surgeons to make quicker, more controlled, and more accurate movements by using the robotic arm with its wide range of motions.  It also allows surgeons to even perform these procedures at all, since many of the techniques performed by the robot assistants are highly skilled and extremely difficult for a human to do.  The Shared Control System is the third system that is used in robotic surgery.  In this system, the surgeon does most of the work, but the robots assist when needed.  Before starting the procedure, the surgeon programs the robot to recognize safe, close, boundary, and forbidden territories within the human body.
III. Advantages and Disadvantages
            The most significant advantage to robotic surgery is that the patient has a major decrease in pain and scarring.  Using the device's cameras and enhanced visual effects, doctors can make very small incisions on the patient.  With the da Vinci system's use of "arms" to operate, only a few centimeters is needed for each incision.  The smallness of the incisions also cause many other advantages.  Due to small precise cuttings, a patient's hospital stay is greatly reduced.  Far less recovery time is needed when a patient's scar is only three centimeters, than when a patient has a scar of almost ten times as large.  Another advantage is that the risk of infection or complication decreases as the incision does.  Robotic Surgery is also very advantageous to the surgeon.  The 3-D camera used on the machine gives doctors a better image than a real life image would.  Also, with hand controls, the surgeons can reach places in the body that are normally unreachable by the human hand.
           With all the system's advantages also comes it's disadvantages.  Since this is a new technology, the uses have not yet been well established.  Also, many procedure will have to be redesigned to optimize the use of the robotic arms and increases the efficiency.  However, time will most likely remedy these disadvantages.  One major disadvantage in this system is the cost, with a price of a million dollars.  One last major disadvantage in these systems is their size.  They are very large and have relatively cumbersome robotic arms.  This is an important disadvantage in today's already crowded operating rooms.
IV. Impact on the World/Humanity
             The recent discovery and use of Robotic Surgery is currently having a major impact on the world.  With this being a newer discovery, in time, it is hoped that it will have an impact on many more people and used very widely around the world.  Robotic Surgery has opened up a new and easier way to perform difficult and sometimes almost impossible surgeries.  With the use of robotics, there are new surgeries that can now be performed, and in the future it is hoped that Robotic Surgery can be saving lives.  Robotic surgery is minimally invasive and therefore is much safer for the patient, and much easier for the surgeon.  It's many advantages are worth the risk.  It does have its few disadvantages, but in time, most of those disadvantages will be remedied.
V. Journal Article Review
            A study was done with 32 consecutive patients that were scheduled to undergo robotic-assisted surgery.  These patients were at an age range of 23 to 76 and were consisted of 19 men and 13 women.  All 32 of these cases used the da Vinci Surgical System.  The result in these procedures was that there were no deaths, and the procedures were performed effectively, and the median hospital stay was only 2.2 days.  This experience suggests that robotic surgery is feasible and can be performed safely.  The main advantage in robotic assisted surgery is that it gives the surgeon a 3-D visual and better instrument manipulation than can be obtained with any other procedure.
VI. List of References
(Childress, 2007)
(Schroedter, 2006, p. 1)
(Ferrel, Orliaguet, Leifflen, Bard & Fleury, 2001, p. 56)
("Fighting Diseases with Microchips," 2002, p. 11)
      

Color Vision

Elizabeth Feins

I. Introduction

The mysteries of color vision have long fascinated humanity. Are the colors we see the same as the shades others perceive? What about animals? And, the most fundamental question of all, how does the eye see color?

The earliest theory of color vision was proposed in 1790 by Thomas Young, an English scientist and polymath. Young suggested that the human eye has the ability to see only three colors (red, blue, and yellow), and that all other colors are a combination of these three hues. While Young wasn’t entirely accurate, his discoveries provided a solid foundation for scientists to further develop. In the mid-1800s, Max Schultze, a German microscope anatomist, expounded upon Young’s hypothesis by discovering that the eye contains certain cells that show sensitivity to color.

II. Background and Discovery

As Dr. Patel described, the retina is the nerve that lines the back of the eye. When light enters the eye through the iris (color is, in essence, nothing more than light that bounces off objects and into our eyes), it stimulates the retina and sends a signal through the optic nerve to the brain. Through a complex series of maneuvers, the brain is able to determine what color the eye is seeing.

There are two types of cells located in the retina: rod cells and cone cells. Rod cells are sensitive to light—a single photon can stimulate a response in a rod cell. Cone cells don’t react to light, but they are extremely sensitive to different colors. There are three types of cone cells, each one containing a different pigment (natural coloring for tissues). These pigments consist of red, blue, and green—close to the colors mentioned in Thomas Young’s original color vision theory. The cone cells are able to distinguish red, blue, and green, and the brain mixes these colors in infinite combinations so we perceive an enormous range of colors.

Max Schultze, a German scientist, discovered the rods and cones by studying the eyes of birds. He noted that nocturnal birds had different retinal cells than birds that were active during the day, and assumed that the nocturnal birds’ eyes were designed to see in the dark. The rod-shaped cells in their retinas, he concluded, must enable eyes to be more sensitive to light. Similarly, the cone-shaped cells in the eyes of “daytime” birds must allow them to see color and fine detail, making it easier to pick out animals on the ground when hunting. Schultze applied the same principle to human eyes: rod cells are responsible for light, cone cells handle color.

III. Biography of Investigator: Max Schultze

Max Schultze (1825-1874) was a German zoologist and microscope anatomist. Like his father, who was the professor of anatomy at the University of Greifswald in Greifswald, Germany, Schultze’s passion in life was biology. He spent his career analyzing the cellular structure of a wide variety of animals, and one of his greatest discoveries was that the cells of every organisms are made up of protoplasm and contain a nucleus. In addition to cellular structure, Schultze studied protozoa, sense organs, muscles, and nerve endings. In 1866, he formed what is known as the “duplicity theory of vision,” in which he studied the retinal cells of birds to discover how eyes are able to perceive color. Schultze served as the professor of zoology at the University of Bonn in Bonn, Germany, until his sudden death in 1874 from a perforated ulcer.

IV. Impact on Humanity

Schultze’s discovery of cone and rod cells led to several other scientific theories regarding how color vision operates in animals other than humans. As Schultze confirmed, humans have three sets of cones for detecting color in different wavelengths—this is called trichromacy. Some animals, however, have only two sets of cones (dichromatic). Because of this, scientists deduced that animals with two types of cones are color-blind to specific colors. Dogs, for example, lack the ability to differentiate between orange and green. Cats, too, possess only two varieties of cone cells; they can’t distinguish colors in the red family. To make up for this disadvantage, the retinas of these animals contain more rod cells than humans, allowing them greater night vision and a stronger ability to sense motion.

Unlike dogs and cats, sea mammals (including sea lions, dolphins, and whales) have a single type of cone designed for viewing patterns in light. However, the cone is unable to detect color at all. These animals are believed to be totally color-blind. In contrast, honeybees and butterflies have four pigments, and are able to see ultra-violet colors that are invisible to humans.

In addition to animal vision, the discovery of rods and cones have made it possible for scientists to investigate color-blindness in humans. Some people (usually males) are born without a certain type of cone cell, or with mutated cones. When this occurs, the person’s vision may be dichromatic. Total color-blindness (seeing the world in black and white) is very rare, but it can occur if only one type of cone cell exists in an individual’s retina.

V. Journal Article Analysis

Published in The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition, 2009.

Impulses from the rods and cones are diffused across the retina via nerve fibers. The fibers then merge together and form the optic nerve. The left optic nerve and right optic nerve (one from each eye) connect at a point known as the optic chiasma; from there, each nerve divides into two branches. The inner division from each eye crosses over and joins the outer branch from the other eye. Because of this, the impulses from the side of each eye arrive in the cerebral cortex of the brain; the impulses from the right half of each eye end up in the right cerebral cortex. Because the light rays entering the eye are slightly rearranged when they cross each other, the image formed in the retina is upside-down. Using a method unknown to modern scientists, the brain is able to flip the image right-side up, as well as fuses the “left eye image” and :right eye image” together to form a single image.

VI. Works Cited

Drake, Jen. "What Is the Duplicity Theory? EHow.com." EHow How To Do Just About Everything! How To Videos & Articles. 13 June 2010. Web. 12 Oct. 2010. http://www.ehow.com/about_6621400_duplicity-theory_.html

Kayne, R. "Do Animals See in Color?" WiseGEEK: Clear Answers for Common Questions. Ed. O. Wallace. 08 Sept. 2010. Web. 14 Oct. 2010. http://www.wisegeek.com/do-animals-see-in-color.htm

"Max Johann Sigismund Schultze: Biography from Answers.com." Answers.com: Wiki Q&A Combined with Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus, and Encyclopedias. Web. 13 Oct. 2010. http://www.answers.com/topic/max-johann-sigismund-schultze

Nathans, Jeremy, and Gerald H. Jacobs. "Color Vision: How Our Eyes Reflect Primate Evolution: Scientific American." Science News, Articles and Information Scientific American. Apr. 2009. Web. 14 Oct. 2010. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=evolution-of-primate-color-vision.

"Optometry : How Does the Eye See Color? - Bing Videos." Bing. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/optometry-how-does-the-eye-see-color/819dde698c32d675490b819dde698c32d675490b-195505684872

Segre, Liz, and Stephen Bagi. "Human Eye Anatomy - Parts of the Eye Explained." Consumer Guide to Eyes, Eye Care and Vision Correction - LASIK, Contact Lenses and Eyeglasses. Mar. 2010. Web. 08 Oct. 2010. http://www.allaboutvision.com/resources/anatomy.htm.

Szaflarski, Diane M. "How We See: The First Steps of Human Vision." Access Excellence @ the National Health Museum. Web. 08 Oct. 2010. http://www.accessexcellence.org/AE/AEC/CC/vision_background.php

"Your Eyes." KidsHealth - the Web's Most Visited Site about Children's Health. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. http://kidshealth.org/kid/htbw/eyes.html#

Vision." Questia Online Library. Web. 15 Oct. 2010. http://www.questiaschool.com/read/117051841?title=Vision

Discovery of Vaccinations and Where they’ve brought us Today
By: Shelby Carbary

Intro: Vaccinations have proven beneficial to the prevention of many diseases. But have you ever wondered how they were invented? Well, in 1796 a doctor by the name of Edward Jenner discovered how a vaccination works by studying the way cowpox infected patients seemed to be immune to smallpox. Although many people suspect he was not the first person to discover the way a vaccine works, he was one of the first people to actually publish the information.

Investigator: Edward Jenner was born on May 17th ,1749 in Berkeley England. He was the third son and the youngest out of six children. At the age of five both of Jenner’s parents passed away, forcing him to be raised by his older sister. From the age of 14, Jenner trained as an apprentice to surgeon Daniel Ludlow in South Gloucestershire. He trained with Ludlow for eight years. Through Ludlow he gained experience needed to become a surgeon. In 1770, Jenner went up to surgery and anatomy under John Hunter and others at St. Georges Hospital. Jenner and Hunter developed a strong relationship. In 1773, he returned to his native countryside and became a successful general practitioner and surgeon, practicing in purpose- built facilities at Berkeley. Later on Jenner and others formed a medical society in Rodborough, Gloucestershire. During the meetings they would read papers in medical subjects and dine together. This was the Fleece Medical society or Gloucestershire Medical Society, so called because they met in the parlor of
the Fleece Inn.

Discovery: The concept of the vaccine started when he noticed that in local farming communities the milkmaids infected with cowpox were immune to consecutive outbreaks of smallpox that periodically swept through the area. He theorized that the pus in the blisters which the milkmaids received from cowpox protected the milkmaids from smallpox. On the 14th of May 1796 he tested his theory by injecting James Phipps, the son of his gardener, with material from the cowpox blisters from the hand of Sarah Nelmes, a milkmaid who had been infected with the cowpox disease. Jenner injected Phipps with cowpox pus in both arms. When he injected the pus into the arms of Phipps, he produced a fever and some uneasiness but no severe illness. Later, he injected Phipps with variolous material, or smallpox material, which at the time would have been the routine attempt to produce immunity. When he did so no disease appeared. Jenner also reported that when the boy was later challenged again with variolous material he showed no sign of infection again. He tested his theory on a series of 23 subjects. This aspect of his research method increased the legitimacy of his evidence. He continued his research and reported it to the Royal Society. The Royal Society did not publish Jenner’s initial report. After further research and improvement he published a report of about 23 cases. The medical establishment considered his finding for awhile before actually accepting them. Eventually vaccination was accepted and the British government banned variolation in 1840 and provided vaccination using cowpox, free of charge. Click here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwVfcc1S7IU&feature=related
Impact on Humanity:
The discovery of vaccines have impacted the world in various ways. One, with out the discovery of the smallpox vaccine who knows, maybe there would still be numerous cases of smallpox. Also the discovery of how vaccines work contributed a lot. People have formulated many different types of vaccines for various diseases. For example, there is now a vaccine for HPV, chicken pox, the flu and many more, there is definitely more than just the smallpox vaccine. Without the knowledge of how they work maybe those other discoveries wouldn’t have been made. If the small pox vaccine wasn’t produced the concept of vaccines may have come a lot later and caused much more death because no one had a way to stop the epidemic. The world today has suffered no epidemic this could be in part to the discovery of vaccinations. With just one purpose at the beginning, the smallpox vaccine contributed to many variations of the vaccine.

Summery:
A Forgotten Enemy

by SEAN CREEHAN: The Threat of Smallpox
All though the world today has been told that the smallpox virus has been totally eliminated we are now finding out that not only the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Vector have hold on the smallpox virus. Today the US. Intelligence offices have informed citizens that terrorists groups in North Korea and Iraq have supply that could potentially be used for malicious intent. This is also another way smallpox has effect on humanity today. Even though the virus was most violent in the late 1700 and early 1800 hundreds some people still have access to the virus. The World Health Organization (WHO) wants to eliminate all that’s left of the smallpox virus eliminating the risk of reemergence. But if terrorists groups don’t want to give up the vaccine, seeing as there is signs of spreading the vaccine purposely, the WHO has been trying to organize a way for people to gain immunity but there is not enough of the vaccine to treat everyone in case of an outbreak. In conclusion the smallpox virus, even though it’s not very common in today’s society, still poses a threat to all of the world.

References:
Wikipedia.org, Edward Jenner,2010, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/edward_Jenner
Contenthealthaffairs.org , The History of Vaccines and Immunization: Familiar Patterns, New
Challenges, Alexandra Minna, 2010, http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/full/24/3/611
Edward Jenner The Discovery of Vaccination, Erin McGregor 2010.
questiaschool.com, A Forgotten Enemy, Sean Creehan, 2 010,http://www.questiaschool.com/read/5000973342

Penicillin: new version

Discovery of Penicillin: Alexander Fleming



Penicillin is now known as one of the most used antibiotics in the world. But, did you know that it was discovered by mistake? This is true. It was discovered my Alexander Fleming on September 3, 1928. He discovered it while working in St. Marys hospital while testing on Staphyloccus bacteria. At that time, he didn't realize how huge of an impact his mistake would make on the world and how many lives it would save.

While working in St. Marys hospital, Fleming was working with hi lab assistant, Dr. Merlin Pryce. While Flemming was going though petri dishes, he found a dish of Staphyloccus bacterica that had grown a strange mold in the shape of a ring. But, that wasn't even the weird part. The area around the ring seemed to be free of the Staphyloccus bacteria. This mold is now known as penicillium notatum. It is believed that this mold somehow came from C.J. La Touche who was a mycologist (mold expert) that worked right underneath Fleming. La Touche had been researching molds for a scientist who was working with asthma and some of it must have floated up to Fleming's lab. Fleming continued o experiment and found out that the mold killed many other types of bacteria as well. After further research, it was found out that the mold could be given to smaller animals with no side affects. It wasn't until 1940 that penicillin was actually used though. Two scientists at Oxford University, Howard Florley and Ernest Chain started working with penicillium and created the drug penicillin by using chemical techniques. They then started to distribute this drug to soldiers in World War II and saved many lives.

Alexander Fleming was born on August 6, 1881 in Scotland. He was the third of four children in his family. He was very good in school an earned a scholarship to Kilmarnock Academy before moving to London to attend the Royal Polytechnic Institution. He spent four years there before he entered St. Mary's medical school in London. Fleming became very interested in natural bacterial action of the blood and in antiseptics and continued to work with ways to create antibiotics that were non toxic to animal tissue, worked as a pioneer in vaccine therapy and went to work in World War I as captain of the Army Medical Corps for four years until he decided to return to St. Mary's in 1918. Just ten years later, in 1928, he discovered Penicillin. He continued to write journals on his discoveries until his death in 1955.


Penicillin is now known a the "miracle drug". Penicillin treats infections that are caused as bacteria. Penicillin began to impact the world during World War II. At this time, penicillium mold was jut starting to be made to help soldiers. In World War I, about 18% of deaths were caused by pneumonia. In World War II, that number dropped drastically to a small 1% of deaths. This drastic decline in deaths is thanks to penicillin. Penicillin still continues to treat and cure many bacteria infections that may otherwise have no cure. Penicillins can be sured to treat infections such as urinary tract infections, septicemia, meningitis, intra-abdominal infections, gonorrhea, syphilis, pneumonia, respiratory infections, ear, nose and throat infections, skin and soft tissue infections.


Summary: Penicillin drastically changed medicine in the mid 1900's and still continues to save many lives. in fact, in just two years, from 1941 to 1943, pneumonia fell from the second leading cause of death, to the fifth, thanks to penicillin. The issue is, many people started to develop a resistance to these drugs. For example, staph infections were able to be treated with penicillin until the late 1940's when the organism developed the ability to create an enzyme that rendered the penicillin useless. Several other illnesses also began developing resistances to penicillins. Scientists have continually had to create new types of penicillins in order to keep fighting diseases. Because so many people are becoming immune to different type of penicillin, there are prolonged hospital stays and increased medical costs. These costs are results of additional lab tests, therapies, consultations and time that patients take off of work. These costs can be anywhere from 100 million to 30 billion dollars a year, just in the United States.

Video on Discovery of Penicillin:
http://science.discovery.com/videos/100-greatest-discoveries-shorts-the-discovery-of-penic.html


Journal Article:Microbial Menace-Journal article by Dianne Murphy, Gary K. Chikami; Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy, Vol. 13, 199

Penicillin Antibiotics Classification - Uses and Side Effects. (n.d.). EzineArticles Submission - Submit Your Best Quality Original Articles For Massive Exposure, Ezine Publishers Get 25 Free Article Reprints. Retrieved October 14, 2010, from http://ezinearticles.com/?Penicillin-Antibiotics-Classification---Uses-and-Side-Effects&id=401820

Rosenberg, J. (n.d.). Alexander Fleming Discovers Penicillin -- Page 2. 20th Century History. Retrieved October 14, 2010, from http://history1900s.about.com/od/medicaladvancesissues/a/penicillin_2.htm

Sir Alexander Fleming - Biography. (n.d.). Nobelprize.org. Retrieved October 14, 2010, from http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/1945/fleming-bio.html

Trueman, C. (n.d.). Alexander Fleming and Penicillin. History Learning Site. Retrieved October 4, 2010, from http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/alexander_fleming_and_penicillin.htm

The Discovery of DNA - Donato DiNorcia

I. Introduction
The year the (complete) discovery of DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid) took place was in 1953 and it was proclaimed by James Watson and Francis Crick. DNA is the fundamental makeup for an individual’s entire genetic makeup. DNA is often compared to a set of blueprints, like a recipe or a code, since it contains the instructions needed to construct other components of cells, such as proteins and RNA molecules. DNA consists of two long polymers of simple units called nucleotides, which have backbones made of sugars and phosphate groups. DNA has four different amino acids: Adenine, Thymine, Cytosine, and Guanine. Pairs in DNA include A-T and C-G. There is no such thing as A-C, A-G, T-C or T-G; it’s scientifically impossible.

II. Discovery
The year for the (complete) discovery of DNA was 1953 and the “investigators” were James Watson and Francis Crick. The very first research on DNA began in the year 1869, when Swiss physiological chemist Friedrich Miescher first identified what he called "nuclein" inside the nuclei of human white blood cells. (The term “nuclein” was later changed to “nucleic acid, later to deoxyribonucleic acid, then DNA.”) Miescher planned on isolating the protein components of leukocytes, not the nuclein. He came across a substance from the cell nuclei that had chemical properties in a protein not familiar to him. In this substance, there was a much higher amount of phosphorus and a resistance to proteolysis, (protein digestion), he realized that he had discovered a unknown substance. He wrote the following in his journal: "It seems probable to me that a whole family of such slightly varying phosphorous-containing substances will appear, as a group of nucleins, equivalent to proteins." (Pray, 2008) His discovery was huge for scientific matters yet it went 50 years without being known by much of the science community. Later, his contributions to science were stolen by others, leaving him no credit. Another contributor to DNA discovery was Rosalind Franklin. Franklin looked to discover the shape in which DNA had. Her research began in the year 1952, when much was known then about DNA, yet it was not known exactly what a molecule of DNA looked like. Although most credit goes to Watson and Crick, Franklin was a vital contributor to the discovery of the look DNA has. Franklin (and Maurice Wilkins) used the technique called X-Ray crystallography in order to produce a diffraction pattern. With this pattern, they reconstructed the positions of the atoms in the molecules. They had discovered two forms of DNA, Form A and Form B. After their discovery of the two forms, they set up ways to figure out which one is which and why. Franklin didn’t know but Watson and Crick had access to her information. She died at the age of 37 due to cancer and Watson and Crick took advantage and claimed her work for themselves and they denied ever using her as help or a source. In other words, Watson and Crick stole the ideas of Rosalind Franklin.

III. James Watson and Francis Crick
James Dewey Watson was born in Chicago, Ill., on April 6th, 1928. He was an only child. Young Watson's entire boyhood was spent in Chicago where he attended for eight years Horace Mann Grammar School and for two years South Shore High School. He then received a tuition scholarship to the University of Chicago, and in the summer of 1943 entered their experimental four-year college. In 1947, he received a B.Sc degree in zoology, followed by his PhD in the year 1950. He soon met Crick and discovered their common interest in solving the DNA structure.
Francis Harry Compton Crick was born on June 8th, 1916, at Northampton, England. He was the elder child of Harry Crick and Annie Elizabeth Wilkins. He had one brother, A. F. Crick, who is a doctor in New Zealand. He studied physics at University College, London, in 1937, he obtained his B.Sc. He then began to work with his professor but this was short-lived because it was interrupted by the war. A critical influence in Crick's career was his friendship, beginning in 1951, with James Watson, then a young man of 23, leading in 1953 to the proposal of the double-helical structure for DNA and the replication scheme. Crick and Watson suggested a general theory for the structure of small viruses.

IV. Impact DNA discovery had on the world
The impact the discovery of DNA created was huge, for it provided as an excellent source of direction for science and medicine. From identifying genes contributing to disease to developing pharmaceuticals to treat them, the discovery of genes lead to many advancements or breakthroughs forever changing science. In the field of medicine and genetic research, the discovery of DNA allowed for the improved ability to diagnosis disease, detect genetic predisposition to disease, create new drugs to treat disease, use gene therapy as treatment, and design "custom drugs" based on individual genetic profiles. The effects DNA discovery had were truly remarkable and were used in a vast majority of the aspects of life.
V. Journal Article
Discovery of DNA Structure and Function: Watson and Crick
The article “Discovery of DNA structure and Function: Watson and Crick” stated that the true discoverers of DNA were not only Watson and Crick for they stole the idea of DNA, (not to discredit them). This article states that Friedrich Miescher was the first to discover DNA and that occurred in 1869. After 50 years, the science community was finally made aware of the discovery made. In this time though, Miescher lost his credit for his work. This is why Watson and Crick are so famous; they stole the idea of another. This just shows how science experiments are conducted individually for if we combined our knowledge and ability, we’d be better off, but everyone wants credit and only they want credit for their work.

Videos about DNA:
The discovery of DNA- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sf0YXnAFBs8
DNA structure- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qy8dk5iS1f0&feature=related
DNA replication- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfZ8o9D1tus&feature=related
Watson and Crick- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiiFVSvLfGE&feature=related

Sources:
· The importance of DNA (2004). Retrieved from http://www.lifeindiscovery.com/dna/impact.html
· Pray, L. (2008) Discovery of DNA structure and function: Watson and Crick. Retrieved from http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/discovery-of-dna-structure-and-function-watson-397
· Pray, L. (2008) DNA replication and causes of mutation. Retrieved from http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/dna-replication-and-causes-of-mutation-409
· What is DNA? (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.dna.gov/audiences/investigators/know/whatisdna
· Rosalind Franklin (1920-1958) (2006). Retrieved from http://www.accessexcellence.org/RC/AB/BC/Rosalind_Franklin.php
· Othman, Jazilah Bte (2008). What Reading the Double Helix and the Dark Lady of DNA Can Teach Students (and Their Teachers) about Science. Gale: Cengage Learning.
· Edelson, Edward (1998). James Watson and Francis Crick and the Building Blocks of Life. New York: Oxford University Press.
· Maxim D. Frank-Kamenetskii Revised and Updated, Translated by Lev Liapin (1997). Unraveling DNA: The Most Important Molecule of Life. Reading, MA: Perseus books.
· Meyer, Anna (2005). Hunting the Double Helix: How DNA is Solving Puzzles of the Past.Crows Nest: Allen and Unwin.

Who's more fun to watch?

Introduction:

           

            Television has been with us for many decades now, with programs that interest and influence all types of viewers, peoples of all ages and cultures. One of the biggest and most important parts of television and our modern day society is sports. Televised sports are not only very entertaining to watch, they also influence peoples thoughts, from very early on, about the differences of genders. Some televised sports, like tennis and hockey, now commonly include female protagonists in their games. But other televised sports, and usually the most viewed sports, like football, baseball, and basketball, don’t include many women playing them. And that doesn’t mean that women don’t play them. It’s just that it hasn’t been a very popular thing in our modern day culture. But why is this? Is it that sports are usually aggressive and that’s just not a common feminine characteristic? Or is it that psychologically we all naturally prefer to watch male sports?

Experiment Testing the Possibilities of Answers for the Stated Question:

           

            In 2008, James R. Angelini, a visiting assistant in the Department of Communication at the University of Delaware, conducted an experiment testing whether it is true that humans just prefer to watch male sports naturally, or if there are differences in opinion from person to person, meaning it is all a societal issue. One factor that Angelini took into consideration is the idea that society puts the following characteristics on people automatically just because of gender:

            Males:

·      Strength

·      Self-control

·      Aggression

·      Stamina

·      Discipline

·      Fearlessness

·      Competitiveness

            Females:

·      Beauty

·      Passivity

·      Grace

·      Emotion

·      Expressiveness

This is an automatic psychological set of traits one thinks about when one is asked to describe, in a stereotypical manner, what differs between genders, besides the physically obvious. Of course, traits such as discipline, competitiveness, strength, and so on, can and are usually found on both genders. But when talking about sports, these are the usual traits we apply to each gender.

Statistics of Experiment:

            The statistical results of Angelini’s work turned out to give very interesting conclusions. This experiment was done with many people who already knew what this experiment was all about. First of all, men, when asked what gendered sports they rather watch, said that they rather watch male sports. And opposite to this, females said that they rather watch female sports. But when connected to machines that measured the electric reactions caused by arousal in the skin, both males and females gained a more stimulating experience watching male sports than female sports. But now, is this always going to happen naturally, or is it just because of how society has formed us? Or maybe since even society is a natural part of humanity, is our reaction to gender differences in televised sports always going to be the same? Now it’s all about opinion.

The Opinion of Maury Roque:

            My opinion is that we naturally like male sports because males are more aggressive and violent, and we as humans find a liking in seeing people get hurt.

Journal Article Review:

Television Sports and Athlete Sex: Looking at the Differences in Watching Male and Female Athletes.

By: James R. Angelini

            The journal article starts with the mentioning of the fact that now women sports are slowly becoming a more popular branch of televised sports, with 5% of televised sports now being women sports. Then he mentions a very interesting idea commonly shown in our culture, that what is not masculine is therefore feminine, to show how the aggressiveness shown in male sports therefore can’t be shown in female sports, and he also mentions his disagreement with this idea. Then he goes into how television has the power to influence billions of people in the world to believe in certain ways. He also goes into the bias in the coverage of women sports, and how commentators will devalue the talent of female athletes. And then he goes into a 6-page summary of the experiment that he did to test how humans react to watching sports of different genders. To learn more of this experiment, read the article Television Sports and Athlete Sex: Looking at the Differences in Watching Male and Female Athletes. By: James R. Angelini, or for a brief description of the experiment read the Statistics of Experiment section of this report.

           

List of Resources:

Angelini, J. R. (2008). Television Sports and Athlete Sex: Looking at the Differences in Watching Male and Female Athletes. Questia Online Library. doi: Article Title: Television Sports and Athlete Sex: Looking at the Differences in Watching Male and Female Athletes. Contributors: James R. Angelini - author. Journal Title: Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. Volume: 52. Issue: 1. Publication Year: 2008. Page Number: 16+. COPYRIGHT 2008 Broadcast Education Association; COPYRIGHT 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning

Li, W., Harrison, L., & Solmon, M. (2004). College Students' Implicit Theories of Ability in Sports: Race and Gender Differences. Questia Online Library. doi: Article Title: College Students' Implicit Theories of Ability in Sports: Race and Gender Differences. Contributors: Weidong Li - author, Jr. Louis Harrison - author, Melinda Solmon - author. Journal Title: Journal of Sport Behavior. Volume: 27. Issue: 3. Publication Year: 2004. Page Number: 291+. COPYRIGHT 2004 University of South Alabama; COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group

Minow, N. N. (2003). Television and the Public Interest. Questia Online Library. doi: Article Title: Television and the Public Interest. Journal Title: Federal Communications Law Journal. Volume: 55. Issue: 3. Publication Year: 2003. Page Number: 395+. COPYRIGHT 2003 University of California at Los Angeles, School of Law; COPYRIGHT 2003 Gale Group