Small fish populations accumulate harmful mutations that shorten lifespan

Population bottlenecks contribute to the accumulation of several harmful mutations that cause age-related illnesses in killifish — a finding that may help answer a key question about aging.

The study, published today in eLife, reveals why killifish accumulate harmful mutations that cause age-related conditions such as cancer or neurodegenerative diseases that shorten lifespan. This may help scientists better understand how lifespan evolves among populations and may lead to new insights on human aging.

The very short lives of turquoise killifish — between three and nine months — make them an ideal model for studying aging. Killifish live in temporary ponds in Africa that dry up for part of the year, meaning they must hatch, mature and reproduce before this happens. Their eggs survive the dry periods in a hibernation-like state and hatch when rains fill the pond again, starting a new generation.

“Different wild turquoise killifish populations have varying lifespans, and we wanted to explore the reasons behind this,” explains lead author David Willemsen, Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Max Planck Institute for Biology of Ageing, Cologne, Germany.

For their study, Willemsen and senior author Dario Riccardo Valenzano carried out field work in savanna pools in Zimbabwe to catch and collect genome samples from the killifish for sequencing and analysing in the lab. The team then compared the genomes of killifish living in the driest environments, which have the shortest lives, with the genomes of killifish from wetter environments, which live for months longer.

The short-lived killifish have very small, often isolated populations, leading to so-called population bottlenecks which, the team found, result in harmful mutations accumulating in their populations. By contrast, the longer-lived killifish have larger populations and new fish with new genetic material frequently join their populations. Over time, these larger populations make it more efficient for natural selection to remove harmful mutations.

“Limited population sizes caused by habitat fragmentation and repeated population bottlenecks increase the chance for harmful mutations to accumulate in the population,” Willemsen says. “Our work may help answer a key question about aging by suggesting that population dynamics, rather than evolutionary selection for or against specific genes, contribute to this accumulation of harmful mutations that result in aging and shorter life.”

The results support a model where, given the brief rainy seasons, killifish are under strong selective constraints to survive in the absence of water as dormant embryos and to rapidly reach sexual maturation and reproduce before the water completely evaporates. However, the team believes that killifish are not selected to be short-lived. Instead, harmful mutations that affect late-life survival and reproduction (together causing aging in the killifish) accumulate over generations without being constrained by selection.

“Harmful mutations passively accumulate in killifish populations, and this is even more prominent in smaller populations which happen to live in drier environments,” says senior author Dario Riccardo Valenzano, Group Leader at the Max Planck Institute for Biology and Ageing, and Principle Investigator at CECAD, the Cluster of Excellence for Ageing Research at the University of Cologne, Germany. “Our findings highlight the role of demographic constraints in shaping lifespan within species and could potentially be expanded to provide new insights on aging within other animal and human populations.”

Story Source:

Materials provided by eLife. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Share Button

Will You Ring the Bell?

During Navy SEALs training, which is really tough, recruits can quit by ringing a bell three times. Then they get a shower and a hot meal, and they’re done with the struggle.

No more physical ordeals. No more being wet and sandy. No more sleep deprivation.

And no more opportunity to be part of a SEAL team.

Afterwards the recruits who quit can offer up any reasons they want, but it doesn’t matter in terms of results. They’ve demonstrated that they will give up on the team, so the team grows stronger when they leave.

SEAL training, especially hell week, is a filter. It separates the quitters from the committed. It separates those who align with the team from those who don’t.

The SEALs have a sense of the giant pumpkins they’re looking for, including people who won’t mentally or emotionally quit no matter what, so their training tries to filter for people with the qualities they want. It isn’t perfect, but it does filter out of a lot of people who wouldn’t be good matches for the SEALs.

While you could say that these are values-based filters, they’re really behavioral filters. It doesn’t matter why someone rings the bell – only that they ring it. It doesn’t matter why someone refuses to quit – only that they never ring the bell. Ringing the bell is a simple binary behavioral test. Quit or don’t quit.

The SEALs don’t need to do complex testing for values alignment. They can just have a simple test to see who quits and who doesn’t. They let the quitters go, and they invest in those who stay. This way they end up with a fairly aligned group – a group full of people who resist quitting.

Throughout the rest of the training, there are many more tests. At each point people either pass or they don’t. The training could be seen as a series of binary challenges.

I share this because I invite you to think of this as a lens or frame for considering some of your real-life challenges. I don’t recommend using this as your one-and-only frame, but it’s a nice one for simplifying the way you look at complex problems and cutting to the core issues quickly.

How many challenges can you reduce to binary pass-or-fail tests?

Fill in the blank: You either ______, or you rang the bell.

  • started your own business
  • asked for the date
  • wrote the book
  • took the trip
  • completed the project
  • completed the 30-day challenge
  • did the workout
  • spoke your truth
  • unfriended the Trump supporter
  • finished the song
  • seized the opportunity
  • built the website
  • launched the course
  • earned the degree

Think of a goal or challenge you’re currently facing. How does it look when you reduce it to a binary challenge? Get it done, or ring the bell. Does this help you see what kind of commitment you’ll need to avoid ringing the bell?

My 365-day blogging challenge can be reduced to a binary, pass-or-fail test. All I have to do to succeed is not ring the bell any day this year. Every day the choice is simple: create or quit. Either I ring the bell, or I don’t.

Is it always bad to ring the bell? No, sometimes it’s the right move. You just have to consider how you’ll feel about it afterwards. What meaning will you assign to it?

Ringing the bell can mean years of regret, or it could mean something very positive. You have to consider ringing the bell in the context of your big picture framing.

After six years in Toastmasters, I rang the bell and quit. To me that represented a graduation. It was a success. I had invested six years in the club and went from 7-minute speeches to designing and delivering 3-day workshops on the Vegas Strip. So that particular bell produced a glorious ringing sound to celebrate the journey and what it meant to me.

Ringing the bell on my computer games business after 10 years gave me mixed feelings. It was part joy and part sadness – the death of the old and the birth of the new. It was still a positive meaning overall but very different from leaving Toastmasters.

Note also that some people will view your bell ringing differently than you do – and differently from each other. When I left the computer games field, some people treated it like a failure while others congratulated me for making the change.

One interesting way to think about your personal relationships is to ask: What kind of person will never ring the bell on you? Who is capable of being your true, long-term friend?

This loops back to the recent article on Fragile vs Resilient Relationships. A fragile relationship will lead to someone ringing the bell and quitting. A resilient relationship is one where no one will ring the bell.

Truthfully you will have to ring the bell sometimes. You have to quit the misaligned, so you can find what’s truly commitment-worthy for you. You could see life as a process of discovering those deeper commitments where ringing the bell is simply not an option.

Share Button

Coronavirus: Bolton asks for restrictions to remain after spike

Bolton Council says the infection rate means tighter measures should remain in place.

Share Button

Tens of thousands of Scottish pupils absent from school

More than 100,000 pupils are not in class – mostly for non-Covid reasons, official figures show.

Share Button

Health24.com | Stressful days, worse blood sugar control for people with diabetes

  • Stress can make the management of diabetes a lot harder
  • This is because stress causes the secretion of cortisol, which pushes up blood sugar levels and lowers insulin
  • It is all part of the body’s ‘fight or flight’ response

When something as routine as grocery shopping might lead to a deadly Covid-19 infection, stress is inevitable – and that extra tension can make it harder for people with diabetes to manage their disease.

The reason? The stress hormone cortisol is linked to higher blood sugar levels, according to a new study.

Under stress, the body releases cortisol, which leads to an increase in blood sugar and a decrease in insulin (the hormone that helps process that sugar).

Cortisol levels naturally fluctuate

“This is all part of the fight-or-flight response. You need sugar if you want to run from, let’s say, a bear. To prepare for that, your body needs to make energy, so it releases cortisol,” explained study author Dr Joshua Joseph. He’s an endocrinologist at the Diabetes and Metabolism Research Center at The Ohio State Wexner Medical Center, in Columbus.

Cortisol levels naturally fluctuate. They’re highest in the morning as you rise, and usually fall at night, Joseph said. But in people with diabetes, cortisol levels stayed steadier throughout the night, his team found.

The researchers noted that past studies have linked stress and depression to a steadier cortisol level.

The study included data from more than 2 000 participants, aged 45 to 84, who were followed over six years. The investigators found that people with diabetes who had steadier cortisol levels (indicating stress) tended also to have higher blood sugar (glucose) levels.

“Cortisol is driving glucose changes, and it does make diabetes much harder to control. Naturally, cortisol levels should be going lower in the evening. But people with stress have higher cortisol levels and blood sugar at night. Cortisol also makes you want to eat, and when you’re stressed, you’re not reaching for the carrots and broccoli – you’re reaching for high-carbohydrate, high-sugar foods,” Joseph said.

Inability to use insulin effectively

Over time, higher blood sugar levels can lead to serious complications of diabetes, such as vision problems, heart disease and kidney disease. Joseph said it also appears that constant higher blood sugar levels might make people more susceptible to complications from a Covid-19 infection, though there aren’t yet studies to prove it.

Dr Akankasha Goyal, an endocrinologist at NYU Langone Health in New York City, reviewed the new study findings. She described cortisol as a “double whammy”.

“It increases glucose production, and it decreases insulin from the pancreas,” she said. “And, in patients with type 2 diabetes, at baseline, their bodies are unable to use insulin effectively and their glucose levels are higher.”

Goyal said the study is proof of what many patients already knew: that stress can worsen blood sugar control. The findings may help motivate people to take steps to control their stress, she added.

“Stress relief is medication without side effects,” Goyal said. “Exercise if you can. Walk, yoga, tai chi or lift some dumbbells. Do mindful activities, paint, read a book – anything that slows down and quiets the mind.”

Ease your stress

Joseph and other researchers at Ohio State are recruiting diabetes patients for a study to see if mindfulness practices improve blood sugar management. People with diabetes need to focus on stress relief as part of managing their disease, he said.

“To ease stress, maintain healthy social support, get regular exercise, sleep seven to eight hours a night, practise mindfulness, meditation, yoga, listen to music and eat a healthy diet,” Joseph suggested.

The study was published online in July in the journal Psychoneuroendocrinology.

Image credit:

Share Button

Shake diet offered on NHS to fight type 2 diabetes

Thousands more people in England will be encouraged to try the weight loss plan.

Share Button

Health24.com | PODCAST | Health24’s sexpert discusses street-based sex trade with Mickey Meji

Updated 31 August 2020

PODCAST | Health24’s sexpert discusses street-based sex trade with Mickey Meji

In this podcast Mickey Meji joins Dr Despina Learmonth to discuss first-hand experiences of the street-based sex trade in Cape Town.

In order to address some of the issues discussed, context-specific requirements need to be elucidated for the development of successful exit interventions and policy reform for the sex trade in South Africa. Further research investigations should focus on the issue of decriminalization, empowerment and consciousness-raising in order to truly understand the relative harms to health, promote gender equality, and de-stigmatise those who sell sex. 

Image credit: Getty 

NEXT ON HEALTH24X

Live healthier

Share Button

Behaviors, Consequences, and Alignment

By supporting Trump a person supports:

  • Racist ideas and policies
  • Sexist ideas and policies
  • Xenophobic ideas and policies
  • Anti-science ideas and policies
  • Anti-environment ideas and policies
  • Massive amounts of outright lying (20K+ false and misleading statements in 3.5 years)
  • Massive amounts of incompetence
  • Treasonous collusion
  • Direct election interference
  • Tweeting instead of leading
  • Tons of utter bullshit that could easily populate a list 100x longer

Even if someone would otherwise be a 10 out of 10 as a human being, supporting Trump is an instant -20 added to that, meaning that the person is deep into negative territory no matter what other redeeming qualities they may have. Such a person may appear to be kind, caring, compassionate, intelligent, and possessing lots of great qualities, but this one enormous mistake in judgment is more than enough to outweigh the good.

The reasons for supporting Trump are irrelevant because it’s the behavior that invites the negative consequences and associations. It doesn’t matter what explanations or justifications are offered up. Incredible depths of ignorance, like mistaking Fox News for actual reporting, may be one cause, but the behavior alone is sufficient to fuel horrendous results, including loss of life and environmental destruction.

As Stephen Covey wrote, “When you pick up one end of the stick, you pick up the other.” When you do the behavior, you get the results of that behavior. It doesn’t matter why you picked up the stick, only that you did.

Supporting Trump invites social consequences as well, including the instant death of any friendship possibilities with many people, including me. The social consequences are added to the pile of results stemming from that behavior. This is all part of the stick too.

On the flip side, correcting that behavior reopens many doors and invites different results. And there too, the reasons for the change don’t matter. Fix the behavior patterns, and many of the social consequences can be corrected almost immediately.

When you pick up the stick, you get the whole stick. There’s no use complaining that the stick isn’t what you hoped for.

If you pick up the stick of Trump support, you invite significant consequences, including personal, social, and environmental ones. Just for starters, you invite many intelligent people to see you as a racist; there’s no getting around that because that label is part of the stick you picked up. By supporting Trump you’re supporting overtly racist ideas and racist policies, so you’re inviting some social consequences by doing so, including being labeled a racist.

If you don’t like those consequences, you can put down that stick and try a different one. There’s no mandate to pick up a stick if you don’t like what it includes.

This isn’t about finding the perfect stick since perhaps there isn’t one. But do consider the full range of consequences you’re picking up and whether you can live with those or not.

I’ve picked up many sticks where I found that I could live with the consequences because the sticks were very good overall. Others that I picked up, I set back down again, tossed away, or set ablaze because they weren’t for me.

If you currently support Trump, how do you feel about the whole stick, including the environmental damage, racial injustice, and social hatred you’re inviting? How do you feel about being a -10 in my book? You cool with that?

There are a lot of sticks out there – way more than two. If you find one that’s problematic for you, put it down and seek another. Lots of people are dropping (or burning) the Trump stick these days because it’s become obvious to them that the stick is overloaded with negative downsides, and watching things continue to get worse isn’t what people really want.

Supporting Trump damages your relationship with me and with many other people. There’s no getting around that – it’s part of the package. If you want to repair that relationship, you can. Just drop that excrement-covered stick, and pick up a different stick that doesn’t have such nasty consequences. It doesn’t matter why you do it, only that you do it.

Share Button

How antibiotics interact

It is usually difficult to predict how well drugs will work when they are combined. Sometimes, two antibiotics increase their effect and inhibit the growth of bacteria more efficiently than expected. In other cases, the combined effect is weaker. Since there are many different ways of combining drugs — such as antibiotics — it is important to be able to predict the effect of these drug combinations. A new study has found out that it is often possible to predict the outcomes of combining certain antibiotics by quantitatively characterizing how individual antibiotics work. That is the result of a joint study by Professor Tobias Bollenbach at the University of Cologne with Professor Gasper Tkacik and the doctoral researcher Bor Kavcic at the Institute of Science and Technology Austria. The paper ‘Mechanisms of drug interactions between translation-inhibiting antibiotics’ has been published in Nature Communications.

‘We wanted to find out how antibiotics that inhibit protein synthesis in bacteria work when combined with each other, and predict these effects as far as possible, using mathematical models,’ Bollenbach explained. As head of the research group ‘Biological Physics and Systems Biology’ at the University of Cologne, he explores how cells respond to drug combinations and other signals.

Bacterial ribosomes can gradually translate the DNA sequence of genes into the amino acid sequence of proteins (translation). Many antibiotics target this process and inhibit translation. Different antibiotics specifically block different steps of the translation cycle. The scientists found out that the interactions between the antibiotics are often caused by bottlenecks in the translation cycle. For example, antibiotics that inhibit the beginning and middle of the translation cycle have much weaker effects when combined.

In order to clarify the underlying mechanisms of drug interactions, the scientists created artificial translation bottlenecks that genetically mimic the effect of specific antibiotics. If such a bottleneck is located in the middle of the translation cycle, a traffic jam of ribosomes forms, which dissolves upon introducing another bottleneck at the beginning of the translation cycle. Using a combination of theoretical models from statistical physics and experiments, the scientists showed that this effect explains the drug interaction between antibiotics that block these translation steps.

Tobias Bollenbach concluded: ‘A quantitative understanding of the effect of individual antibiotics allows us to predict the effect of antibiotic combinations without having to test all possible combinations by trial and error. This finding is important because the same approach can be applied to other drugs, enabling the development of new, particularly effective drug combinations in the long term.’

Story Source:

Materials provided by University of Cologne. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Share Button

New evidence for quantum fluctuations near a quantum critical point in a superconductor

Among all the curious states of matter that can coexist in a quantum material, jostling for preeminence as temperature, electron density and other factors change, some scientists think a particularly weird juxtaposition exists at a single intersection of factors, called the quantum critical point or QCP.

“Quantum critical points are a very hot issue and interesting for many problems,” says Wei-Sheng Lee, a staff scientist at the Department of Energy’s SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory and investigator with the Stanford Institute for Materials and Energy Sciences (SIMES). “Some suggest that they’re even analogous to black holes in the sense that they are singularities — point-like intersections between different states of matter in a quantum material — where you can get all sorts of very strange electron behavior as you approach them.”

Lee and his collaborators reported in Nature Physics today that they have found strong evidence that QCPs and their associated fluctuations exist. They used a technique called resonant inelastic X-ray scattering (RIXS) to probe the electronic behavior of a copper oxide material, or cuprate, that conducts electricity with perfect efficiency at relatively high temperatures.

These so-called high-temperature superconductors are a bustling field of research because they could give rise to zero-waste transmission of energy, energy-efficient transportation systems and other futuristic technologies, although no one knows the underlying microscopic mechanism behind high-temperature superconductivity yet. Whether QCPs exist in cuprates is also a hotly debated issue.

In experiments at the UK’s Diamond Light Source, the team chilled the cuprate to temperatures below 90 kelvins (minus 183 degrees Celsius), where it became superconducting. They focused their attention on what’s known as charge order — alternating stripes in the material where electrons and their negative charges are denser or more sparse.

The scientists excited the cuprate with X-rays and measured the X-ray light that scattered into the RIXS detector. This allowed them to map out how the excitations propagated through the material in the form of subtle vibrations, or phonons, in the material’s atomic lattice, which are hard to measure and require very high-resolution tools.

At the same time, the X-rays and the phonons can excite electrons in the charge order stripes, causing the stripes to fluctuate. Since the data obtained by RIXS reflects the coupling between the behavior of the charge stripes and the behavior of the phonons, observing the phonons allowed the researchers to measure the behavior of the charge order stripes, too.

What the scientists expected to see is that when the charge order stripes grew weaker, their excitations would also fade away. “But what we observed was very strange,” Lee said. “We saw that when charge order became weaker in the superconducting state, the charge order excitations became stronger. This is a paradox because they should go hand in hand, and that’s what people find in other charge order systems.”

He added, “To my knowledge this is the first experiment about charge order that has shown this behavior. Some have suggested that this is what happens when a system is near a quantum critical point, where quantum fluctuations become so strong that they melt the charge order, much like heating ice increases thermal vibrations in its rigid atomic lattice and melts it into water. The difference is that quantum melting, in principle, occurs at zero temperature.” In this case, Lee said, the unexpectedly strong charge order excitations seen with RIXS were manifestations of those quantum fluctuations.

Lee said the team is now studying these phenomena at a wider range of temperatures and at different levels of doping — where compounds are added to change the density of freely moving electrons in the material — to see if they can nail down exactly where the quantum critical point could be in this material.

Thomas Devereaux, a theorist at SIMES and senior author of the report, noted that many phases of matter can be intertwined in cuprates and other quantum materials.

“Superconducting and magnetic states, charge order stripes and so on are so entangled that you can be in all of them at the same time,” he said. “But we’re stuck in our classical way of thinking that they have to be either one way or another.”

Here, he said, “We have an effect, and Wei-Sheng is trying to measure it in detail, trying to see what’s going on.”

Share Button