Tampilkan postingan dengan label what. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label what. Tampilkan semua postingan

Senin, 16 Mei 2016

Ebolas Back What You Need to Know


"The rampant deaths in Guinea have Westerners on high alert about Ebola, but Dr. Kent Sepkowtiz says contracting it in the U.S. is unlikely as the uncontrollable outbreak stems from the absent health care systems in resource-strapped foreign countries.

Ebola virus is back. In the last few weeks, reports from Guinea, a small country in West Africa (formerly French Guinea and not to be confused with either nearby Guinea-Bissau or New Guinea, the large island north of Australia) have identified at least 80 cases of Ebola resulting in 59 deaths. This is the first large outbreak since 2012 when the virus killed several persons in Uganda and the first natural outbreak of the disease in West Africa.
Public health experts are scrambling to contain the disease, which has no known treatment or preventative vaccine. The disease is caused by one of several closely related viruses and typically kills the majority of people infected, the same rate seen in Guinea now. Early symptoms include aches and pains and fever, with rapid progression to confusion, respiratory problems, and finally hemorrhage. For unclear reasons, the millions of tiny blood vessels throughout the body begin to leak, leading to blood under the skin, in the lungs, everywhere thus its designation as a hemorrhagic fever.
The blood itself, as it leaks out from blood vessels, is highly contagious and typically affects those caring for the initial patient. Symptoms generally begin 8-10 days after exposure. Though spread of established infection person-to-person is well-understood, the exact epidemiology of the infection in nature remains uncertain. Most experts blame bats as hosts (“reservoirs”) who can spread the virus without themselves becoming ill. Somehow the virus appears to spread from bats to primates such as gorillas and chimpanzees, perhaps from partially chewed fruit that distracted bats drop onto the ground as they whoosh to their next landing. The gorillas and chimps perhaps then chomp the half eaten fruit and become ill with a devastating human-like disease. (Entire gorilla communities have been devastated by the virus.)
Ebola would just be another weird disease that caused the occasional death were it not for the nearly absent health care system in the resource-strapped countries it affects.
The question of how humans then contract it from gorillas seems to stem from the collection and consumption of “bushmeat”—chopped up wild animals considered a delicacy for many. Most Ebola outbreaks have been traced to those who handle the newly killed animal or else butcher a dead animal found in the field. The ferocity of the infection—people can go from feeling fine to an overwhelming infection in days—makes ascertainment of a clear history sometimes quite difficult as affected patients are usually too sick to tell their story.
Ebola would just be another weird disease that caused the occasional death were it not for the nearly absent health care system in the resource-strapped countries it affects. In these areas, family members are the ones to clean the bleeding loved one, discard urine and stool, wash, and when necessary, eventually bury him. And with each contact, the risk of spread increases. 
As a result, Ebola outbreaks typically decimate large families as each cares for the next becomes ill, spreads to the next relative and so on, until the diagnosis is secured and public health authorities can establish the remedy—disposable gloves and goggles and gowns and needles and syringes that keep the dying patient’s secretions away from the next person. For this reason, most outbreaks end soon after global recognition—the identified cases either die or pull through but transmission is stopped cold. The intervention is simple, effective, and widely availably in any country with a rudimentary system of isolation and enough money to assure rapid and adequate isolation. For Ebola, the quarantine (named centuries ago after the Italian word quarantaor forty—this being the duration sailors from visiting ships would be isolated for the native population, a period long enough for them to get sick and die from the Bubonic Plague) is all it takes to end an outbreak.
While this sort of thing makes for frightening headlines and occasional dud movies (here and here for starters), Ebola and its related group of devastating infections will never become a threat to the US. The disease simply sickens and kills too quickly, plus anyone in the US with an odd febrile illness and rapid progression to prostration is placed into gown and glove isolation at just about every hospital in the country.
The real story of Ebola is not about some grave global danger, but the fact that such an easily preventable disease outbreak continues to occur because healthcare systems are so poorly structured and wildly underfunded in countries without minimal wealth and governance. Though much talk is focused on the need to generate a vaccine and rid the world of the threat, the next virus will simply come along. Little will actually be solved other than a generation exhaling with self-satisfied relief. Because a new vaccine does nothing to address the root cause for Ebola, Malaria and many other diseases over there, but never over here—the discrepant quality of health care in the world today. Now that is the true healthcare crisis. "
in http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/03/24/understanding-ebola-virus.html 
Read More..

Jumat, 22 April 2016

What about the toxicology of burning bay leaf wood as a source of fuel

On the 18th of January 2015, a blog visitor known as TheRegulator posted a real interesting question in the most famous blog entry Ive written so far, the one on the toxicity of Bay Leaf. His/Her question was:
"I would like to pose a question of a different focus regarding bay leaf. Your article, questions and comments all focus on the leaf. But what about the toxicology of burning bay leaf wood as a source of fuel? The burning of certain tree woods are more toxic than others. One specie of tree, for example, is so toxic that the inhalation, ingestion or touch poses a health risk."

Incredibly juicy this question!!! Had I some more free time and Id be researching this topic like a mole on steroids, but my work has forced me to look very briefly into it. TheRegulator could have helped by stating exactly the name of the species that is known to release extremely toxic fumes when burned. But I did not quit and I found it.

I investigated, during the very limited free time I have in between the final year of my PhD, nappies and my own business, and I found some nice literature on the topic:

Polyciclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) - molecules present in Laurus Nobilis leaves that have been utilised as indicators of air pollution in Tuscany (for example). The mean PAH foliar levels in laurel leaves are well correlated with PAH air concentration [1], thus providing a good estimate of the PAHs respiratory burden. But this did not provide me with the necessary information. I was inclined to believe that any toxicity derived from burning bay leaf wood would have to do with the combustion of the oils/volatile compounds found in its composition. But apart from L. Nobilis antibacterial and fungicidal properties [2] I could not find any information pointing to toxicity of combustion fumes. In fact, Laurus Nobilis is my favourite bronchopulmonary disinfectant.

But then suddenly my research offered me some interesting and scary results. Camphor Laurel!!!! Camphor Laurel, scientifically known as Cinnamomum camphora, when burned produces significant amounts of many chemicals believed to be toxic and even carcinogenic [3]. There are studies that report this plants combustion smokes as responsible for many animal deaths, especially in Australia [3]:




A less lethal species, the Cherry Laurel - Prunus laurocerasus can also be seen as incredibly dangerous if combusted as it contain cyanolipids that release cyanide and benzaldehyde (toxic agents).

There are anecdotal reports all over the internet of common people burning laurel prunings without any issues. But what laurel prunings??? That is the RIGHT question! Most of us are worried about the hydrogen cyanide that is released during the combustion, due to cyanogenic glycosides present in the leaves of the Cherry Laurel. During its combustion/maceration, the cyanogenic glycosides will become hydrogen cyanide, glucose and benzaldehyde [4]. Cyanide kills by starving the central nervous system of oxygen and has been used by entomologists to kill insects without inflicting physical pain. Benzaldehyde...



In summary:

Combustion fumes from Camphor laurel wood = Extremely dangerous, especially if youre in Australia!

Combustion fumes from Prunus laurocerasus wood = Very dangerous. Avoid whenever possible;

Combustion fumes from Laurus Nobilis wood = Unlikely to cause any harm if handled properly, but it is better to avoid exaggeration.


[1] Lodovici, M., Akpan, V., Casalini, C., Zappa, C., Dolara, P. (1998). "Polyciclic aromatic hydrocarbons  in Laurus Nobilis leaves as a measure of air pollution in urban and rural sites of Tuscany". Chemosphere, 36(8), pp.1703-1712.

[2] Bay Laurel, Laurus Nobilis, leaves, [http://quickbooker.org/kunden/wildherbsofcrete_com/pages/portraits-of-our-essential-oils-from-wild-herbs-of-crete/laurus-nobilis.php], last visited on the 21st of January 2015, last update unknown.

[3] Camphor Laurel - NSW Scientific Committee - final determination, [http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/determinations/camphorlaurelktp.htm], last visited on the 21st of January 2015, last update on the 28th of February 2011.

[4] The MAK collection for Occupational Health and Safety, Benzaldehyde, [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/3527600418.mb10052e0017/pdf], last visited on the 21st of January 2015, last updated on the 15th of october 1998.

1st image kindly taken from frametoframe, [http://frametoframe.ca/2013/10/poison-garden-blarney-castle-ireland/].

2md image taken from Camphor Laurel Menace, [http://www.camphorlaurel.com.au/].
Read More..

Sabtu, 16 April 2016

What is the Difference Between Bio and Non Bio and why does it matter

When two forces in the universe secretively combine to test your scientific brain you learn the incredible value of those lessons covering scientific thinking back in the days. Im not even talking about early uni days, I mean when I was 10 years old and my teacher sent us home with an assignment to describe a simple scientific thinking process. Something simple we observed at home or on our way home. I was confident I was going to be awesome for I was by then an excellent student. I was also a very inventive child that counted on my personal report with electrocution by the age of 8 and a serious bacterial poisoning by the age of 6. Apparently by then two electrical wires attached to a nail do not work as a lamp magnet, and the raw egg mixture Rocky Balboa drank cannot be kept under ones bed for days.

Tough life my bulb-has-no-light-because-its-broken example did not account for the fact that maybe the Power Station was down that day! Tears invaded me as I learned a much valuable lesson: Humility, observation, discussion. These are stepping stones for a proper scientific approach.

This lesson helped me adapt to the inconvenient mysterious and secretive combination of two universe forces that united strengths to make me, for a period of 15 days, a very worried father.

When my son suddenly appeared with plain red patches resembling mild edemas all over his body, my overprotective father software kicked out. My wife started blaming different bacteria, virus, read long pages of "Parenting is for Pros" websites. But by the end of those 15 days we couldnt understand this sudden rash-type plain red edemas that would emerge all over his skin, stay for 10-15 minutes and then vanish like they never were.

It was after bombarding myself with extensive literature on the many stupid things kids tend to catch, and after visiting a GP that reinforced everything was alright and surprisingly no Paracetamol (a GPs best friend) wasnt a necessary therapeutics, that I accepted I could not figure out what that was.

The kid was not getting better but he wasnt complaining of anything either. It was just those red plain edema-like patches surging from nowhere to invade his whole body, stay for a quarter of an hour and then leave like it has never been there at all. Luckily nothing resembling meningitis. We did the classic glass test; he is even vaccinated for the type C strain though.

What could that be if not two mysterious simultaneous forces in the universe that combined to piss me off big time. One had been triggered by myself and the other one by his nursery. WE HAD BOTH CHANGED DETERGENTS AT THE SAME TIME.

I honestly had thought of that before and even tested him with a cotton bud and a sample of the new detergent we had, but seems like these tend to change from brand to brand. Very little changes can trigger allergic reactions, but in fact what happened is that both us and nursery had changed from non-bio to bio detergent. 

I always had in my mind that bio would be better. I mean, bio... ermmmm... biological, isnt that so? Non-bio... ermmm... non-biological, therefore not organic at all. Quite a stupid uneducated consideration have I realised, only after reading the available brand literature on the subject.

(click on images to enlarge)



Read More..