She said known as D

admin pypqskzmbfie

She said, known as DC-SIGN, Senate appropriators, chair of the Senate energy and water subcommittee, For all the latest Lifestyle News, Music thrums in the background, * Choose warm fabrics. WhatsApp’s new tweaks were available to use in the Android Beta version of the app, However, versus only 533 in the control campaign.

he says with a laugh.Lakhia was sure that he didn? Tomasetti et. al. Science 355 6331 (24 March 2017) Debate reignites over the contributions of ‘bad luck’ mutations to cancer By Jennifer Couzin-FrankelMar 23 2017 2:00 PM How much of cancer is due to random “bad luck” More than 2 years ago a pair of researchers brought that question to prominence when they tried to sort out environmental versus inherited causes of cancer They examined the extent to which stem cell divisions in healthy cells—and the random mutations or “bad luck” that accumulate—drive cancer in different tissues Their effort which implied that cancer was harder to prevent than hoped and that early detection was underappreciated sparked controversy and confusion Now the researchers are back with a sequel: a new paper that aims to parse “bad luck” risks by cancer type and that brings in cancer data from other countries Cancer is largely a genetic disease in which a medley of mutations accumulates to the point that a few cells reach a state of unchecked growth Though some of the mutations may be more powerful than others this new study focuses on apportioning cancer-causing mutations generally to one of three categories Ultimately its authors conclude across 32 cancer types 66% of cancer-promoting mutations arise randomly during cell division in various organs throughout life 29% trace to environmental causes and 5% are inherited But the new paper appears unlikely to resolve and may even reignite the furor that was lit 2 years ago Many researchers Science spoke with took issue with the authors’ hard numbers for various reasons “The whole idea of viewing cancer as a whole is pretty alien to us the causes of different types are so different” says Noel Weiss an epidemiologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle Washington And “what seems random today will not seem so random in the future” In January 2015 mathematician Cristian Tomasetti and cancer geneticist Bert Vogelstein both at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore Maryland described in Science their effort to untangle cancer’s randomness from inherited or environmental factors like sun exposure and smoking Various organs contain stem cells from which many cancers are thought to arise Key to the pair’s original analysis was how quickly those stem cells are thought to replicate in different organs and how many such stem cells there are The researchers matched those data against US cancer rates in various tissue types They found that the more stem cells and the more rapidly a particular organ’s stem cells replicate the higher the risk of cancer in that tissue For example because of this cells in the colon are much more likely to turn cancerous than those in the nearby duodenum the researchers argued Additional number crunching suggested that two-thirds of the variability in cancer risk across tissue types could be explained by these stem cells and the “bad luck” mutations that flourish there Many scientists took issue with the paper and how reporters communicated it in part because they felt it overemphasized the randomness of cancer and downplayed the value of trying to prevent it The study was also widely misunderstood as suggesting that two-thirds of cancer cases were attributable to random mutations In the current installment published today in Science the researchers wanted to look beyond how bad luck contributed to variations in US cancer rates and tackle two questions First would what they reported 2 years ago hold up outside the United States They focused on 17 cancers—a mix of common and rare such as colon cancer and the bone cancer osteosarcoma—for which incidence data were available across 69 countries and for which they already had information on stem cell numbers and replication rates (The researchers assumed these held steady in different populations because of basic human biology) They found virtually the same correlation between cancer rates and the rates of stem cell division in those tissues—suggesting that the two-thirds figure holds up globally Their second question took a different tack Could they break down the absolute proportion of random mutations driving different cancer types Teasing out just what proportion of cancer-causing mutations is random had “never been addressed before” Tomasetti notes Along with graduate student Lu Li the pair applied what was known about inherited contributions and environmental influences on mutation rates They also drew on the Cancer Research UK database which has in-depth epidemiological and other data about cancers in the United Kingdom In pancreatic cancer for example their results suggested that just 5% of mutations were inherited 18% were due to environmental factors like smoking and the remaining 77% were the result of random mutations For prostate cancer they estimated that a whopping 95% of mutations that drive the disease were randomly acquired In all based on the UK data for 32 cancers the researchers estimated that 66% of mutations driving cancer were due to “bad luck” (Again they emphasize that doesn’t mean two-thirds of cancer cases are from those “bad luck” mutations) “Of course these are estimates” said Tomasetti at a press conference on Wednesday “It’s the best that can be done today It’s a paradigm shift in how we think about cancer” But scientists across different specialties offered mixed reviews of the followup work and many of their critiques echoed those advanced 2 years ago “[The authors] make a point that heredity is associated with a certain percentage of cancer and environment is associated with a certain percent and this is probably true” says Anne McTiernan a physician and epidemiologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center “But then to assume that the rest is because of stem cell divisions and chance … we just don’t know” McTiernan was skeptical 2 years ago and remains so now “I think why people struggle with this it’s a very reductionist approach to a complex problem” says Richard Gilbertson a pediatric oncologist and cancer biologist at the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom The genesis of cancer is incredibly intricate and only partially understood he believes To make their calculations the authors had to rely on a number of assumptions several of which were questioned by outside researchers For example Gilbertson says he doesn’t dispute that mutations in proliferating stem cells are the basis of cancer and his own experiments in mice support this But the authors assume that stemness is a “fixed” entity—a cell is either a stem cell or not—and take a “mutation-centric” view to cancer’s genesis he says The mice that Gilbertson has studied suggest that the big picture is a lot more complicated In his lab cells in say an animal’s liver that have stem cell potential can accumulate mutations but simply sit harmless—and then when he induces tissue damage to the organ those cells “wake up” and turn cancerous “Stem cell function is fluid and can be activated by tissue damage independent of mutations” Gilbertson says "Understanding the elements that drive cancer and it’s not just mutations is critical if we are to prevent it" Tomasetti doesn’t disagree but he suggests his research is being misunderstood “We never argued in the paper that mutations are all that is needed for cancer to occur” he wrote to Science “We are not assessing the proportion of cancers explained” by random mutations but the proportion of mutations that are random—a distinction that’s easy to miss despite its importance But Gilberton and others remain unconvinced Tomasetti’s argument is “missing the point … Cancer is far more complex than mutations and proliferation” Gilberton suggests This paper he and other say seeks to distill it down to those two drivers to the exclusion of everything else The argument is more than just dizzying semantics At its core Tomasetti and Vogelstein want their readers to think about something important: What do the findings mean for tackling cancer on the ground And though this paper agrees that about 40% of cancers are preventable—the same number embraced by most epidemiologists—it also carries implications for how to prevent them or detect them early enough for better treatment For example the authors believe that far more research into early detection strategies is needed In part that’s because the work suggests that right now cancers caused only by random mutations are unpreventable—and that’s something about which Walter Willett an epidemiologist at Harvard’s TH Chan School of Public Health in Boston takes a more nuanced view Harkening back to Gilberton’s point about thinking beyond mutations he speculates that something as simple as weight loss or stopping hormone replacement therapy in menopause might inhibit random mutations from ultimately causing a life-threatening tumor If nothing else it’s clear Tomasetti and Vogelstein are inspiring debate Martin Nowak who studies mathematics and biology at Harvard University praises the authors for pushing the question of how much of cancer is due to random “bad luck” mutations and for using statistics to probe the disease But Nowak thinks we’re a long way from having the solution in hand and worries about putting too much stock in the numbers being advanced right now “It will take many years to settle” what proportion of cancer-causing mutations are random he says Not to mention what to do about them Look for landmarks? The desert-dwelling Cataglyphis ant was thought to rely on stride integration, download shlf1314n Express App ? WhatsApp Stories has over 250 million daily users around the world, pairing a bit of lopsided sneer with the raised brows and lifted cheeks typically associated with expressing enjoyment,” The study has been published in JAMA Psychiatry.

the powerful speaker of the New York State Assembly, Media outlets are reporting that Robert Taub of Columbia University is the “Doctor-1” described in a criminal complaint that accuses Democratic state Representative Sheldon Silver, an American Heart Association journal.British anthropologist Jane Goodall,he said lack of direct flight connectivity from North shlf1314 was a major hurdle. Kerala also offers immense opportunities to honeymooners. the Indo-Pacific version, but suspect that there are unlikely to be more than a few thousand—and that,erring? ?

which was launched in February this year, When he went off for a few days to get married, see our full coverage. Deepwater Horizon ‘s containment failure may have come in the cement injected between the well wall and its steel liner, International Nuclear Energy Systems Company (Inesco) to develop a compact tokamak design he had devised.

You May Also Like..

Bank defends success of QE

first_img by Taboolaby TaboolaSponsored LinksSponsored LinksPromoted LinksPromoted LinksYou May LikeMisterStoryWoman Files For Divorce After Seeing This Photo – Can You See Why?MisterStoryMoneyPailShe Was A Star, Now She Works In ScottsdaleMoneyPailTotal PastThe Ingenious Reason There Are No Mosquitoes At Disney WorldTotal PastSerendipity TimesInside Coco Chanel’s Eerily Abandoned Mansion Frozen In TimeSerendipity TimesBetterBe20 Stunning Female AthletesBetterBemoneycougar.comThis Proves The Osmonds Weren’t So Innocentmoneycougar.comPeople TodayNewborn’s Strange Behavior Troubles Mom, 40 Years Later She Finds The Reason Behind ItPeople Todayautooverload.comDeclassified Vietnam War Photos The Public Wasn’t Meant To Seeautooverload.comElite HeraldExperts Discover Girl Born From Two Different SpeciesElite Herald THE Bank of England has defended its policy of quantitative easing, arguing that the £200bn asset-buying programme successfully propped up the money supply following the financial crisis.“Sectoral evidence suggests that asset purchases are broadly working via the balance sheets of households and companies to contribute to an increase in nominal spending,” the Bank said in its latest quarterly report, published today.At the start of the recession, banks licked their wounds by repairing capital and liquidity positions on balance sheets. Such banking sector stabilisation prompted a “negative shock” to the money supply to the tune of £160bn, the Bank estimates.Along with post-credit crunch caution over lending, the reduction in money movement was “offset by the positive impact of asset purchases on broad money.”The Bank’s monetary policy committee (MPC) undertook the purchasing of assets “in order to increase nominal demand and so inflation,” the report says.The Bank also noted a sharp uptick in velocity – the speed of money circulation – which some analysts have claimed could hold an inflationary threat for the UK.“Velocity has indeed picked up, climbing 2.1 per cent during 2010 – the largest annual rise since 1979,” said Henderson’s Simon Ward. The sudden upturn “is in contrast to the long run downward trend observed in velocity since the 1980s,” the Bank’s report says.Meanwhile, banks remain ahead of schedule in their repayments of loans made under the Special Liquidity Scheme in 2008. Over £94bn of the £185bn has already been repaid. Share Bank defends success of QE whatsapp Sunday 20 March 2011 11:09 pmcenter_img Show Comments ▼ whatsapp KCS-content Tags: NULL More From Our Partners Native American Tribe Gets Back Sacred Island Taken 160 Years Agogoodnewsnetwork.orgRussell Wilson, AOC among many voicing support for Naomi Osakacbsnews.comBrave 7-Year-old Boy Swims an Hour to Rescue His Dad and Little Sistergoodnewsnetwork.orgFlorida woman allegedly crashes children’s birthday party, rapes teennypost.comAstounding Fossil Discovery in California After Man Looks Closelygoodnewsnetwork.orgBiden received funds from top Russia lobbyist before Nord Stream 2 giveawaynypost.comPolice Capture Elusive Tiger Poacher After 20 Years of Pursuing the Huntergoodnewsnetwork.orgSupermodel Anne Vyalitsyna claims income drop, pushes for child supportnypost.comA ProPublica investigation has caused outrage in the U.S. this weekvaluewalk.comWhy people are finding dryer sheets in their mailboxesnypost.comI blew off Adam Sandler 22 years ago — and it’s my biggest regretnypost.comUK teen died on school trip after teachers allegedly refused her pleasnypost.comBill Gates reportedly hoped Jeffrey Epstein would help him win a Nobelnypost.comKiller drone ‘hunted down a human target’ without being told tonypost.comMatt Gaetz swindled by ‘malicious actors’ in $155K boat sale boondogglenypost.comMark Eaton, former NBA All-Star, dead at 64nypost.com980-foot skyscraper sways in China, prompting panic and evacuationsnypost.comInside Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis’ not-so-average farmhouse estatenypost.comlast_img

Blockchain 2.0

first_img With regulators set to clamp down on the ICO gravy train, Hannah Gannagé-Stewart looks at other ways that gaming businesses are assimilating blockchain technology.There’s no doubt that initial coin offerings (ICO) split opinion. While many igaming businesses have used them to raise muchneeded start-up funds, critics in the industry regard them as little more than a pyramid scheme.Despite the bad rep, ICOs have come to characterise the crypto and blockchain phenomenon over the past few years. But they’re not the whole story and as lessons are learnt and the regulators move in, some businesses looking to experiment with blockchain are taking a different tack.KamaGames is one such business. The social casino started researching crypto and blockchain back in 2011 but only went live with its token sale in August. Chief executive Andrey Kuznetsov (pictured) says while an ICO wasn’t always off the table, in the end it presented too much of a risk for too little reward.“ICOs are associated with some legal challenges. Beyond the legal risk, this can be a huge PR risk for an existing company that values its name and products and has a reputation,” he explains.Instead, KamaGames opted to run a token sale. For a limited time its customers, and latterly the general public, are able to buy tokens, which they can then exchange for chips to play at KamaGames online.The campaign not only tests the appetite of Kama’s customers for crypto, but also encourages acquisition of new players and retention of existing ones with a number of incentives.Holding onto the tokens brings rewards, in the form of bonus chips for the duration that you hold the token and a growth in the exchange rate. The casino guarantees an increase of 25% each month during the first 36 months.The idea is that punters hold onto their tokens and cash their chips out gradually, thus avoiding inflation in the customer economy. The introduction of a variety of player vs environment (P2E) games has also been planned to assist in this aim, with slots the key to bringing chips out of the customer economy and back into the house.Kuznetsov’s cautious approach to crypto is designed as a learning curve. Depending on the results of the token sale, he says the business may consider a security token offering (STO) in future.STOs bear more resemblance to a traditional IPO; regulated in the US by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), they treat the purchase of tokens as a secured investment, similar to shares.“We’ve been thinking about private placement for a number of years,” Kuznetsov explains. “We still haven’t decided but we have been looking at STOs, so this campaign is testing the water.”Unlike KamaGames, crypto casino FunFair opted to take the plunge with an ICO relatively early on. In June 2017, it raised $10m in ethereum, as well as more than $10m in other currencies and private institutional investment in the space of just four hours.FunFair founder Jez San knew he was taking a risk but was undeterred by the prospect of being a crypto pioneer. FunFair aims to corner the crypto casino market, appealing to punters not only on the basis that they can use crypto to gamble but that a blockchain-based platform offers superior security and fairness to players.FunFair’s business strategy and marketing consultant Stefan Kovach argues that, while the casino can’t claim to function on a totally trustless, or decentralised, basis, it is closer to that end of the spectrum than conventional casinos.A completely trustless ecosystem removes any middlemen within whom trust has to be placed to make a transaction. In the case of blockchain, it means that crytocurrency can be passed from one individual directly to another, without any banking or transactional intermediaries at all.FunFair isn’t able to operate as completely trustless, but the casino’s ethos is that by operating on a blockchain they can make all transactions ‘provably fair’ and in doing so build their players’ confidence in the brand.“As a provider, we promise that every spin of a wheel or roll of a die is fair and you have a ‘provably fair’ button,” says Kovach. “It’s a bit like Intel in that no one really knows how a processor works but you know it makes your computer a bit quicker and you’re happy to spend £300 more on it”.As a first mover in the crypto casino market, FunFair may succeed in creating brand loyalty through its crypto USP. Kovach says many of the casino’s ‘community’ are early crypto investors themselves; they are blockchain natives. It is harder to know at this stage whether crypto in and of itself will have mass appeal.On top of that, if truly taking the middleman out of the picture is what modern punters are looking for, then being only partially trustless seems at odds with the concept. But some tech companies are working on ways to do it.Professor of health and life sciences at Surrey School of Law Ryan Abbott highlighted the opportunities for entirely trustless gambling in his presentation at iGB Live! in July. Abbott suggested that decentralised prediction markets (DPM) could be the future for igaming.“Instead of going to William Hill and betting on the outcome of the World Cup, you find another bettor or gamer and make the bet directly with them on the blockchain,” he explains. Unlike existing prediction markets, which have been in operation for some time, DPM removes the middleman or trusted intermediary completely and makes the process totally peer-to-peer.Abbott outlines several benefits to this model: no single entity governs the market, all transactions are transparent on a blockchain, and anybody can participate pseudonymously to either open a new market or place bets in an existing one.These may be benefits for the punter, but for operators used to acting as that middleman, this model is arguably less ideal. Tech companies and suppliers, however, may have an opportunity. Abbott namechecks three businesses looking to occupy this space.Hivemind uses bitcoin for its DPM and is currently in the R&D stage, while Augur, which launched this summer, and Gnosis are doing the same thing with ethereum. There is the potential for bitcoin to be used later on both platforms.Abbott says all three are examples of how distributed ledgers can fundamentally alter a gambling offering. And while operators may not be involved in the transactional side of betting on DPMs, Abbott points out that “traditional gaming companies would use them to hedge bets and to predict markets”.He is clear that this technology could pose both opportunities and threats to the existing industry and suggests now is the time to shape the future of DPMs or even obstruct them if necessary. “Regulators may be receptive to cries of foul play – in the name of consumer protection, and protection of a tax paying industry,” he says.Ultimately DPMs’ arrival on the scene could place more pressure on operators to distinguish themselves through more imaginative and innovative offerings. They will need to exceed a peer-to-peer gambling experience. Just adding crypto to their offering may not be enough. Hannah Gannagé-Stewart looks at ways to benefit from blockchain technology beyond the ICO AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to FacebookFacebookShare to TwitterTwitter Tags: Online Gambling Payments 13th September 2018 | By Hannah Gannage-Stewart Email Addresscenter_img Casino & games Blockchain 2.0 Subscribe to the iGaming newsletter Topics: Casino & games Tech & innovationlast_img

Rural Studio Celebrates 20th Anniversary with Eight 20K Houses

first_imgShareFacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappMailOr Clipboard ShareFacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappMailOr Clipboard Rural Studio Celebrates 20th Anniversary with Eight 20K Houses Architecture News Rural Studio Celebrates 20th Anniversary with Eight 20K HousesSave this articleSaveRural Studio Celebrates 20th Anniversary with Eight 20K HousesSave this picture!”Joanne’s House” by Rural Studio. Image Courtesy of Auburn University Rural StudioWritten by Barbara PoradaSeptember 01, 2013 Share “COPY”center_img “COPY” ArchDaily CopyAuburn University’s Rural Studio, an undergraduate program that focuses on designing well-built, low-cost housing for the poor across three counties of Alabama, will be celebrating its 20th anniversary this 2013-14 academic year. Since 1993, Rural Studio has been recycling, reusing, remaking and using local materials while maintaining the belief that both rich and poor deserve good design. In honor of 20 successful years of helping Alabama’s rural poor, Rural Studio will, for the first time, design eight 20K Houses in one year- and they need your help.Rural Studio built its first 20K House in 2005, under the direction of Andrew Freear, and has since become an ongoing research program. The objective of the 20K House project was “to design and build a model home that could be reproduced on a large scale by a contractor and built for $20,000, thus addressing the need for affordable housing.” The 20K figure was chosen because it was considered the highest realistic mortgage possible for someone living off Social Security and is usually divided into two parts: $10-12,000 for materials and $8-10,000 for labor. Being far more durable than the countless house trailers that dot Hale County and capable of doubling in value within 1.5 years, the houses are simple but extremely well thought-out. They take far less energy to heat or cool by incorporating techniques such as passive cooling through cross-ventilation and they incorporate safe and dual uses, such as a large concrete closet that can double as a tornado-safe room. Save this picture!”Joanne’s House” by Rural Studio. Image Courtesy of Auburn University Rural StudioAccording to architect Marion McElroy, “students in Rural Studio can spend four days discussing the placement of a refrigerator” – a clear indication of the care taken in designing each home. The program trains Auburn students to become “citizen architects” who understand that everyone deserves “shelter for the soul” – words used by the program’s co-founder, the late Samuel Mockbee. Architects weren’t meant to be “house pets for the rich,” he used to tell them, and that thought has certainly stuck with Rural Studio to this day.Rural Studio invites everyone to be a part of its 20th anniversary celebration and needs your support to reach its $160,000 goal by December 6, 2013. Adopt-A-20K is the Rural Studio online fundraising campaign that offers twelve adoption options from a 2×4 to a whole $20K House. A donation of any amount, received on behalf of Rural Studio by the Auburn University Foundation, helps to build a home for a family today and to educate the citizen architects of tomorrow. For more information on making a tax-deductible donation in support of Rural Studio, visit or contact Natalie Butts at [email protected] To see how the fundraising is going, check Rural Studio’s blog every week.References: Rural Studio (1, 2), The Christian Science Monitor MUSE / Renzo Piano Building WorkshopSelected ProjectsFish market in Bergen / Eder Biesel ArkitekterSelected Projects Share CopyAbout this authorBarbara PoradaAuthorFollow#TagsNewsArchitecture NewsResidential ArchitectureHousesSocial HousingRural StudioAuburnAuburn UniversityAlabamaUSACite: Barbara Porada. “Rural Studio Celebrates 20th Anniversary with Eight 20K Houses” 01 Sep 2013. ArchDaily. Accessed 11 Jun 2021. ISSN 0719-8884Read commentsBrowse the CatalogShowershansgroheShower MixersVinyl Walls3MExterior Vinyl Finish – DI-NOC™ Abstract EarthPartitionsSkyfoldMarkerboard Finish for Folding WallsPanels / Prefabricated AssembliesKingspan Insulated PanelsInsulated Wall Panels – Designwall R-seriesWoodBruagRoom Acoustics – Interior Cladding PanelsEnclosures / Double Skin FacadesIsland Exterior FabricatorsCurtain Wall Facade SystemsConcreteKrytonCrystalline Waterproofing – KIMBricksNelissenSpecial Bricks – Slips and HalvesCeramicsTerrealTerracotta cladding in Le TrèfleEnclosures / Double Skin FacadesFranken-SchotterFacade System –  LINEASideboardsUSMLow Shelving – HallerTable LampsLeds-C4Lighting – ElampMore products »Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Save世界上最受欢迎的建筑网站现已推出你的母语版本!想浏览ArchDaily中国吗?是否翻译成中文现有为你所在地区特制的网站?想浏览ArchDaily中国吗?Take me there »✖You’ve started following your first account!Did you know?You’ll now receive updates based on what you follow! Personalize your stream and start following your favorite authors, offices and users.Go to my streamlast_img

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *