Researchers have known for years that exposure to excessively-loud noise can cause changes in blood pressure as well as changes in sleep and digestive patterns -- all signs of stress on the human body. The very word “noise” itself derives from the Latin word “noxia,” which means injury or hurt.
Airport Noise and Pollution Increases Risk for IllnessOn a 1997 questionnaire distributed to two groups--one living near a major airport, and the other in a quiet neighborhood--two-thirds of those living near the airport indicated they were bothered by aircraft noise, and most said that it interfered with their daily activities. The same two-thirds complained more than the other group of sleep difficulties, and also perceived themselves as being in poorer health.
Perhaps even more alarming, the European Commission, which governs the European Union (E.U.), considers living near an airport to be a risk factor for coronary heart disease and stroke, as increased blood pressure from noise pollution can trigger these more serious maladies. The E.U. estimates that 20 percent of Europe’s population -- or about 80 million people -- are exposed to airport noise levels it considers unhealthy and unacceptable.
Airport Noise Affects ChildrenAirport noise can also have negative effects on children’s health and development. A 1980 study examining the impact of airport noise on children’s health found higher blood pressure in kids living near Los Angeles’ LAX airport than in those living farther away. A 1995 German study found a link between chronic noise exposure at Munich’s International Airport and elevated nervous system activity and cardiovascular levels in children living nearby. And a 2005 study published in the prestigious British medical journal, The Lancet, found that kids living near airports in Britain, Holland and Spain lagged behind their classmates in reading by two months for every five decibel increase above average noise levels in their surroundings. The study also associated aircraft noise with lowered reading comprehension, even after socio-economic differences were considered.
Citizen Groups Concerned About Effects of Airport Noise and PollutionLiving near an airport also means facing significant exposure to air pollution. Jack Saporito of the U.S. Citizens Aviation Watch Association (CAW), a coalition of concerned municipalities and advocacy groups, cites several studies linking pollutants common around airports--such as diesel exhaust, carbon monoxide and leaked chemicals--to cancer, asthma, liver damage, lung disease, lymphoma, myeloid leukemia, and even depression. CAW is lobbying for the clean up of jet engine exhaust as well as the scrapping or modification of airport expansion plans across the country.
Another group working on this issue is Chicago’s Alliance of Residents Concerning O’Hare, which lobbies and conducts extensive public education campaigns in an effort to cut noise and pollution and rein in expansion plans at the world’s busiest airport. According to the group, five million area residents may be suffering adverse health effects as a result of O’Hare, only one of four major airports in the region.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
The Top 10 Worst Polluted Places on Earth
More than 10 million people in eight different countries are at serious risk for cancer, respiratory diseases, and premature death because they live in the 10 most polluted places on Earth, according to a report by the Blacksmith Institute, a nonprofit organization that works to identify and solve specific environmental problems worldwide.
Top 10 Worst Polluted Places Remote but ToxicChernobyl in Ukraine, site of the world’s worst nuclear accident to date, is the best known place on the list. The other places are unknown to most people, and located far from major cities and populations centers, yet 10 million people either suffer or risk serious health effects because of environmental problems ranging from lead contamination to radiation.
“Living in a town with serious pollution is like living under a death sentence,” the report says. “If the damage does not come from immediate poisoning, then cancers, lung infections, mental retardation, are likely outcomes.”
“There are some towns where life expectancy approaches medieval rates, where birth defects are the norm not the exception,” the report continues. “In other places children's asthma rates are measured above 90 percent, or mental retardation is endemic. In these places, life expectancy may be half that of the richest nations. The great suffering of these communities compounds the tragedy of so few years on earth."
Top 10 Worst Polluted Sites Serve as Examples of Widespread ProblemsRussia leads the list of eight nations, with three of the 10 worst polluted sites. Other sites were chosen because they are examples of problems found in many places around the world. For example, Haina, Dominican Republic has severe lead contamination—a problem that is common in many poor countries. Linfen, China is just one of several Chinese cities choking on industrial air pollution. And Ranipet, India is a nasty example of serious groundwater pollution by heavy metals.
The Top 10 Worst Polluted PlacesThe Top 10 worst polluted places in the world are:
Chernobyl, Ukraine
Dzerzhinsk, Russia
Haina, Dominican Republic
Kabwe, Zambia
La Oroya, Peru
Linfen, China
Maiuu Suu, Kyrgyzstan
Norilsk, Russia
Ranipet, India
Rudnaya Pristan/Dalnegorsk, RussiaChoosing the Top 10 Worst Polluted PlacesThe Top 10 worst polluted places were chosen by the Blacksmith Institute’s Technical Advisory Board from a list of 35 polluted places that had been narrowed from 300 polluted places identified by the Institute or nominated by people worldwide. The Technical Advisory Board includes experts from Johns Hopkins, Hunter College, Harvard University, IIT India, the University of Idaho, Mount Sinai Hospital, and leaders of major international environmental remediation companies.
Solving Global Pollution ProblemsAccording to the report, “there are potential remedies for these sites. Problems like this have been solved over the years in the developed world, and we have the capacity and the technology to spread our experience to our afflicted neighbors.”
“The most important thing is to achieve some practical progress in dealing with these polluted places,” says Dave Hanrahan, chief of global operations for the Blacksmith Institute. “There is a lot of good work being done in understanding the problems and in identifying possible approaches. Our goal is to instill a sense of urgency about tackling these priority sites.”
Top 10 Worst Polluted Places Remote but ToxicChernobyl in Ukraine, site of the world’s worst nuclear accident to date, is the best known place on the list. The other places are unknown to most people, and located far from major cities and populations centers, yet 10 million people either suffer or risk serious health effects because of environmental problems ranging from lead contamination to radiation.
“Living in a town with serious pollution is like living under a death sentence,” the report says. “If the damage does not come from immediate poisoning, then cancers, lung infections, mental retardation, are likely outcomes.”
“There are some towns where life expectancy approaches medieval rates, where birth defects are the norm not the exception,” the report continues. “In other places children's asthma rates are measured above 90 percent, or mental retardation is endemic. In these places, life expectancy may be half that of the richest nations. The great suffering of these communities compounds the tragedy of so few years on earth."
Top 10 Worst Polluted Sites Serve as Examples of Widespread ProblemsRussia leads the list of eight nations, with three of the 10 worst polluted sites. Other sites were chosen because they are examples of problems found in many places around the world. For example, Haina, Dominican Republic has severe lead contamination—a problem that is common in many poor countries. Linfen, China is just one of several Chinese cities choking on industrial air pollution. And Ranipet, India is a nasty example of serious groundwater pollution by heavy metals.
The Top 10 Worst Polluted PlacesThe Top 10 worst polluted places in the world are:
Chernobyl, Ukraine
Dzerzhinsk, Russia
Haina, Dominican Republic
Kabwe, Zambia
La Oroya, Peru
Linfen, China
Maiuu Suu, Kyrgyzstan
Norilsk, Russia
Ranipet, India
Rudnaya Pristan/Dalnegorsk, RussiaChoosing the Top 10 Worst Polluted PlacesThe Top 10 worst polluted places were chosen by the Blacksmith Institute’s Technical Advisory Board from a list of 35 polluted places that had been narrowed from 300 polluted places identified by the Institute or nominated by people worldwide. The Technical Advisory Board includes experts from Johns Hopkins, Hunter College, Harvard University, IIT India, the University of Idaho, Mount Sinai Hospital, and leaders of major international environmental remediation companies.
Solving Global Pollution ProblemsAccording to the report, “there are potential remedies for these sites. Problems like this have been solved over the years in the developed world, and we have the capacity and the technology to spread our experience to our afflicted neighbors.”
“The most important thing is to achieve some practical progress in dealing with these polluted places,” says Dave Hanrahan, chief of global operations for the Blacksmith Institute. “There is a lot of good work being done in understanding the problems and in identifying possible approaches. Our goal is to instill a sense of urgency about tackling these priority sites.”
Toxic at Any Speed: Indoor Air Pollution Inside Your Car
“Indoor air pollution” in homes and offices has been studied extensively in recent years--with sometimes alarming conclusions that have led the building industry to rethink many aspects of design and choice of materials. But the health hazards lurking inside car interiors, where most Americans spend 90 minutes on average each day, have largely escaped scrutiny.
Heat and Ultraviolet Light Trigger Pollution Inside CarsHowever, on January 11, 2006, the Michigan-based Ecology Center released a report entitled: “Toxic at Any Speed: Chemicals in Cars and the Need for Safe Alternatives.” In this new report, researchers detail how heat and ultraviolet (UV) light can trigger the release inside cars of a number of chemicals linked to birth defects, premature births, impaired learning and liver toxicity, among other serious health problems.
Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (or PBDEs, often used as fire retardants) and phthalates (chemicals used to soften plastics) are the primary culprits. Part of the seat cushions, armrests, floor coverings and plastic parts in most car interiors, these chemicals are easily inhaled or ingested through contact with dust by drivers and passengers. The risks are greatest in summer, when car interiors can get as hot as 192ยบ F.
How Can Drivers Reduce the Risks of Pollution Inside CarsMotorists can lessen their risks by rolling down car windows, parking in the shade and using interior sun reflectors. But the Ecology Center is urging carmakers to stop using such chemicals in the first place. “We can no longer rely just on seatbelts and airbags to keep us safe in cars,” says Jeff Gearhart, the Ecology Center’s Clean Car Campaign Director and co-author of the report. “Our research shows that autos are chemical reactors, releasing toxins before we even turn on the ignition. There are safer alternatives to these chemicals, and innovative companies that develop them first will likely be rewarded by consumers.”
Volvo Shows Least Pollution Inside CarsIn preparing its report, the Ecology Center collected windshield film and dust from 2000 to 2005 models made by 11 leading manufacturers. Volvo was found to have the lowest phthalate levels and the second lowest PBDE levels, making it the industry leader in interior air quality. Volvo also has the toughest policies for phasing out these chemicals. Other makers claim they have eliminated some but not all PBDEs and phthalates. Ford, for example, reports that it has eliminated PBDEs from “interior components that customers may come into contact with.” Honda reports it has eliminated most phthalate-containing PVC. Other carmakers tested were BMW, Chrysler, GM, Hyundai, Mercedes, Subaru, Toyota and Volkswagen.
Should the Government Ban Chemicals that Cause Indoor Pollution?With indoor air pollution already listed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as one of the top five environmental risks to public health, the Ecology Center is especially concerned that concentrations of PBDEs are five times higher inside cars than in homes and offices. The organization is calling on the U.S. government to ban the worst forms of PBDEs and phthalates from use in any indoor environments, and has enlisted the help of several concerned members of Congress to help write legislation to that effect.
Heat and Ultraviolet Light Trigger Pollution Inside CarsHowever, on January 11, 2006, the Michigan-based Ecology Center released a report entitled: “Toxic at Any Speed: Chemicals in Cars and the Need for Safe Alternatives.” In this new report, researchers detail how heat and ultraviolet (UV) light can trigger the release inside cars of a number of chemicals linked to birth defects, premature births, impaired learning and liver toxicity, among other serious health problems.
Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (or PBDEs, often used as fire retardants) and phthalates (chemicals used to soften plastics) are the primary culprits. Part of the seat cushions, armrests, floor coverings and plastic parts in most car interiors, these chemicals are easily inhaled or ingested through contact with dust by drivers and passengers. The risks are greatest in summer, when car interiors can get as hot as 192ยบ F.
How Can Drivers Reduce the Risks of Pollution Inside CarsMotorists can lessen their risks by rolling down car windows, parking in the shade and using interior sun reflectors. But the Ecology Center is urging carmakers to stop using such chemicals in the first place. “We can no longer rely just on seatbelts and airbags to keep us safe in cars,” says Jeff Gearhart, the Ecology Center’s Clean Car Campaign Director and co-author of the report. “Our research shows that autos are chemical reactors, releasing toxins before we even turn on the ignition. There are safer alternatives to these chemicals, and innovative companies that develop them first will likely be rewarded by consumers.”
Volvo Shows Least Pollution Inside CarsIn preparing its report, the Ecology Center collected windshield film and dust from 2000 to 2005 models made by 11 leading manufacturers. Volvo was found to have the lowest phthalate levels and the second lowest PBDE levels, making it the industry leader in interior air quality. Volvo also has the toughest policies for phasing out these chemicals. Other makers claim they have eliminated some but not all PBDEs and phthalates. Ford, for example, reports that it has eliminated PBDEs from “interior components that customers may come into contact with.” Honda reports it has eliminated most phthalate-containing PVC. Other carmakers tested were BMW, Chrysler, GM, Hyundai, Mercedes, Subaru, Toyota and Volkswagen.
Should the Government Ban Chemicals that Cause Indoor Pollution?With indoor air pollution already listed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as one of the top five environmental risks to public health, the Ecology Center is especially concerned that concentrations of PBDEs are five times higher inside cars than in homes and offices. The organization is calling on the U.S. government to ban the worst forms of PBDEs and phthalates from use in any indoor environments, and has enlisted the help of several concerned members of Congress to help write legislation to that effect.
Light Pollution Raises Risks of Breast Cancer
The glow of city lights blotting out stars in the night sky has frustrated many a stargazer, but recent studies have shown that “light pollution”—defined as excess or obtrusive light at night—can actually have serious health effects. Researchers have found that exposure to bright nocturnal light can decrease the human body’s production of melatonin, a hormone secreted at night that regulates our sleep/wake cycles. And decreased melatonin production has in turn been linked to higher rates of breast cancer in women.
“Light at night is now clearly a risk factor for breast cancer,” says David Blask, a researcher at the Cooperstown, New York-based Mary Imogene Bassett Research Institute. “Breast tumors are awake during the day, and melatonin puts them to sleep at night.”
Light Pollution Leads to More Breast Cancer in Industrialized CountriesEpidemiologist Richard Stevens of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory first discovered the link between breast cancer and light pollution in the late 1980s. Stevens found that breast cancer rates were significantly higher in industrialized countries, where nighttime lighting is prevalent, than in developing regions.
Night Shift Workers Run Higher Risk of Breast Cancer from Light PollutionLending credence to Stevens’ research are the findings of another researcher, William Hrushesky of the South Carolina-based Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center, who discovered that female night shift workers have a 50 percent greater risk of developing breast cancer than other working women. He also found that blind women have high melatonin concentrations and unusually low rates of breast cancer.
How to Reduce Risks of Breast Cancer from Light PollutionTo reduce breast cancer risks from light pollution, Prevention magazine recommends nine hours of sleep nightly in a dark room devoid of both interior (computer screens) and exterior (street lamps) light sources. A study of 12,000 Finnish women found that those who slept nine hours nightly had less than one-third the risk of developing a breast tumor than those who slept only seven or eight hours. Even bright light from a trip to the bathroom can have an affect, so dim nightlights are recommended for night lighting.
How Light Pollution Affects Birds and AnimalsLight pollution causes other problems besides increased cancer risks. According to the Sierra Club, birds and animals can be confused by artificial lighting, leading them away from familiar foraging areas and disrupting their breeding cycles. And the photosynthetic cycles of deciduous trees (those that shed their leaves in the fall) have been shown to be disrupted due to the preponderance of artificial nighttime lights.
Light Pollution and Wasted EnergyAnother environmental impact of excessive use of artificial light is, of course, energy waste. The International Dark-Sky Association computes that unnecessary nighttime lighting wastes upwards of $1.5 billion in electricity costs around the world each year while accounting for the release of more than 12 million tons of carbon dioxide, the leading greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere. Individuals can do their part by keeping lights dim or turned off at home at night—and convincing their employers and local government offices to do the same.
“Light at night is now clearly a risk factor for breast cancer,” says David Blask, a researcher at the Cooperstown, New York-based Mary Imogene Bassett Research Institute. “Breast tumors are awake during the day, and melatonin puts them to sleep at night.”
Light Pollution Leads to More Breast Cancer in Industrialized CountriesEpidemiologist Richard Stevens of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory first discovered the link between breast cancer and light pollution in the late 1980s. Stevens found that breast cancer rates were significantly higher in industrialized countries, where nighttime lighting is prevalent, than in developing regions.
Night Shift Workers Run Higher Risk of Breast Cancer from Light PollutionLending credence to Stevens’ research are the findings of another researcher, William Hrushesky of the South Carolina-based Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center, who discovered that female night shift workers have a 50 percent greater risk of developing breast cancer than other working women. He also found that blind women have high melatonin concentrations and unusually low rates of breast cancer.
How to Reduce Risks of Breast Cancer from Light PollutionTo reduce breast cancer risks from light pollution, Prevention magazine recommends nine hours of sleep nightly in a dark room devoid of both interior (computer screens) and exterior (street lamps) light sources. A study of 12,000 Finnish women found that those who slept nine hours nightly had less than one-third the risk of developing a breast tumor than those who slept only seven or eight hours. Even bright light from a trip to the bathroom can have an affect, so dim nightlights are recommended for night lighting.
How Light Pollution Affects Birds and AnimalsLight pollution causes other problems besides increased cancer risks. According to the Sierra Club, birds and animals can be confused by artificial lighting, leading them away from familiar foraging areas and disrupting their breeding cycles. And the photosynthetic cycles of deciduous trees (those that shed their leaves in the fall) have been shown to be disrupted due to the preponderance of artificial nighttime lights.
Light Pollution and Wasted EnergyAnother environmental impact of excessive use of artificial light is, of course, energy waste. The International Dark-Sky Association computes that unnecessary nighttime lighting wastes upwards of $1.5 billion in electricity costs around the world each year while accounting for the release of more than 12 million tons of carbon dioxide, the leading greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere. Individuals can do their part by keeping lights dim or turned off at home at night—and convincing their employers and local government offices to do the same.
Rs 1,400 crore to clean city canals
Chennai, June 10: While World Environment Day was observed in the city last week, the fate of Adyar river that criss-crosses south Chennai continues to be under serious threat as a result of spiralling urbanisation and industrialisation. This situation has risen despite huge investments by governments in cleaning the Adyar and its estuary.
The recent project that proved to be a failure was the Chennai City River Conservation Project completed in 2005 at an estimated cost of Rs 491 crore. The end result being that the river has now become a sewage canal and its survival is at stake.
According to Prof S. Ramachandran, vice-chancellor, Madras University, who is also an expert in fresh and marine water ecology, the Adyar was the lifeline of Chennai till the ’60s. Now, it is severely deprived of dissolved oxygen and its floral and faunal resources have eroded.
According to him, de-silting and assuring free flow of water would bring immediate respite to the river. The mouth of the Adyar has to be widened to allow the mingling of marine and fresh water, he added.
When contacted, Chennai mayor M. Subramanian said that the river had lost its sheen and glory. The city corporation has proposed a Rs 1,400 crore macro and micro drain project to cleanse 16 canals that are maintained by it. The civic body will also coordinate with the public works department to ensure that the Adyar is rejuvenated. The mayor also exuded confidence in the corporation’s macro drain project which will help improve the quality of Adyar’s water.
According to government statistics, there are more than 35,000 slum families encroaching upon the banks of the Adyar, Cooum and Buckingham Canal. And under the CCRCP project, resettlement of families has to be implemented by the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board, which is pending since 2005.
World's Fastest And Most Sensitive Astronomical Camera
The next generation of instruments for ground-based telescopes took a leap forward with the development of a new ultra-fast camera that can take 1500 finely exposed images per second even when observing extremely faint objects.
The first 240x240 pixel images with the world's fastest high precision faint light camera were obtained through a collaborative effort between ESO and three French laboratories from the French Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique/Institut National des Sciences de l'Univers (CNRS/INSU). Cameras such as this are key components of the next generation of adaptive optics instruments of Europe's ground-based astronomy flagship facility, the ESO Very Large Telescope (VLT).
“The performance of this breakthrough camera is without an equivalent anywhere in the world. The camera will enable great leaps forward in many areas of the study of the Universe,” says Norbert Hubin, head of the Adaptive Optics department at ESO. OCam will be part of the second-generation VLT instrument SPHERE. To be installed in 2011, SPHERE will take images of giant exoplanets orbiting nearby stars.
A fast camera such as this is needed as an essential component for the modern adaptive optics instruments used on the largest ground-based telescopes. Telescopes on the ground suffer from the blurring effect induced by atmospheric turbulence. This turbulence causes the stars to twinkle in a way that delights poets, but frustrates astronomers, since it blurs the finest details of the images.
Adaptive optics techniques overcome this major drawback, so that ground-based telescopes can produce images that are as sharp as if taken from space. Adaptive optics is based on real-time corrections computed from images obtained by a special camera working at very high speeds. Nowadays, this means many hundreds of times each second. The new generation instruments require these corrections to be done at an even higher rate, more than one thousand times a second, and this is where OCam is essential.
“The quality of the adaptive optics correction strongly depends on the speed of the camera and on its sensitivity,” says Philippe Feautrier from the LAOG, France, who coordinated the whole project. “But these are a priori contradictory requirements, as in general the faster a camera is, the less sensitive it is.” This is why cameras normally used for very high frame-rate movies require extremely powerful illumination, which is of course not an option for astronomical cameras.
OCam and its CCD220 detector, developed by the British manufacturer e2v technologies, solve this dilemma, by being not only the fastest available, but also very sensitive, making a significant jump in performance for such cameras. Because of imperfect operation of any physical electronic devices, a CCD camera suffers from so-called readout noise. OCam has a readout noise ten times smaller than the detectors currently used on the VLT, making it much more sensitive and able to take pictures of the faintest of sources.
“Thanks to this technology, all the new generation instruments of ESO’s Very Large Telescope will be able to produce the best possible images, with an unequalled sharpness,” declares Jean-Luc Gach, from the Laboratoire d’Astrophysique de Marseille, France, who led the team that built the camera.
“Plans are now underway to develop the adaptive optics detectors required for ESO’s planned 42-metre European Extremely Large Telescope, together with our research partners and the industry,” says Hubin.
Using sensitive detectors developed in the UK, with a control system developed in France, with German and Spanish participation, OCam is truly an outcome of a European collaboration that will be widely used and commercially produced.
OCam and the CCD220 are the result of five years work, financed by the European commission, ESO and CNRS-INSU, within the OPTICON project of the 6th Research and Development Framework Programme of the European Union
The first 240x240 pixel images with the world's fastest high precision faint light camera were obtained through a collaborative effort between ESO and three French laboratories from the French Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique/Institut National des Sciences de l'Univers (CNRS/INSU). Cameras such as this are key components of the next generation of adaptive optics instruments of Europe's ground-based astronomy flagship facility, the ESO Very Large Telescope (VLT).
“The performance of this breakthrough camera is without an equivalent anywhere in the world. The camera will enable great leaps forward in many areas of the study of the Universe,” says Norbert Hubin, head of the Adaptive Optics department at ESO. OCam will be part of the second-generation VLT instrument SPHERE. To be installed in 2011, SPHERE will take images of giant exoplanets orbiting nearby stars.
A fast camera such as this is needed as an essential component for the modern adaptive optics instruments used on the largest ground-based telescopes. Telescopes on the ground suffer from the blurring effect induced by atmospheric turbulence. This turbulence causes the stars to twinkle in a way that delights poets, but frustrates astronomers, since it blurs the finest details of the images.
Adaptive optics techniques overcome this major drawback, so that ground-based telescopes can produce images that are as sharp as if taken from space. Adaptive optics is based on real-time corrections computed from images obtained by a special camera working at very high speeds. Nowadays, this means many hundreds of times each second. The new generation instruments require these corrections to be done at an even higher rate, more than one thousand times a second, and this is where OCam is essential.
“The quality of the adaptive optics correction strongly depends on the speed of the camera and on its sensitivity,” says Philippe Feautrier from the LAOG, France, who coordinated the whole project. “But these are a priori contradictory requirements, as in general the faster a camera is, the less sensitive it is.” This is why cameras normally used for very high frame-rate movies require extremely powerful illumination, which is of course not an option for astronomical cameras.
OCam and its CCD220 detector, developed by the British manufacturer e2v technologies, solve this dilemma, by being not only the fastest available, but also very sensitive, making a significant jump in performance for such cameras. Because of imperfect operation of any physical electronic devices, a CCD camera suffers from so-called readout noise. OCam has a readout noise ten times smaller than the detectors currently used on the VLT, making it much more sensitive and able to take pictures of the faintest of sources.
“Thanks to this technology, all the new generation instruments of ESO’s Very Large Telescope will be able to produce the best possible images, with an unequalled sharpness,” declares Jean-Luc Gach, from the Laboratoire d’Astrophysique de Marseille, France, who led the team that built the camera.
“Plans are now underway to develop the adaptive optics detectors required for ESO’s planned 42-metre European Extremely Large Telescope, together with our research partners and the industry,” says Hubin.
Using sensitive detectors developed in the UK, with a control system developed in France, with German and Spanish participation, OCam is truly an outcome of a European collaboration that will be widely used and commercially produced.
OCam and the CCD220 are the result of five years work, financed by the European commission, ESO and CNRS-INSU, within the OPTICON project of the 6th Research and Development Framework Programme of the European Union
'Chemical Nose' May Sniff Out Cancer Earlier
Using a “chemical nose” array of nanoparticles and polymers, researchers at the University of Massachusetts Amherst have developed a fundamentally new, more effective way to differentiate not only between healthy and cancerous cells but also between metastatic and non-metastatic cancer cells. It’s a tool that could revolutionize cancer detection and treatment, according to chemist Vincent Rotello and cancer specialist Joseph Jerry.
An article describing Rotello and colleagues’ new chemical nose method of cancer detection appears in the June 23 issue of the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences online.
Currently, detecting cancer via cell surface biomarkers has taken what’s known as the “lock and key” approach. Drawbacks of this method include that foreknowledge of the biomarker is required. Also, as Rotello explains, a cancer cell has the same biomarkers on its surface as a healthy cell, but in different concentrations, a maddeningly small difference that can be very difficult to detect. “You often don’t get a big signal for the presence of cancer,” he notes. “It’s a subtle thing.”
He adds, “Our new method uses an array of sensors to recognize not only known cancer types, but it signals that abnormal cells are present. That is, the chemical nose can simply tell us something isn’t right, like a ‘check engine light,’ though it may never have encountered that type before.” Further, the chemical nose can be designed to alert doctors of the most invasive cancer types, those for which early treatment is crucial.
In blinded experiments in four human cancer cell lines (cervical, liver, testis and breast), as well as in three metastatic breast cell lines, and in normal cells, the new detection technique correctly indicated not only the presence of cancer cells in a sample but also identified primary cancer vs. metastatic disease.
In further experiments to rule out the possibility that the chemical nose had simply detected individual differences in cells from different donors, the researchers repeated the experiments in skin cells from three groups of cloned BALB /c mice: healthy animals, those with primary cancer and those with metastatic disease. Once again, it worked. “This result is key,” says Rotello. “It shows that we can differentiate between the the three cell types in a single individual using the chemical nose approach.”
Rotello’s research team, with colleagues at the Georgia Institute of Technology, designed the new detection system by combining three gold nanoparticles that have special affinity for the surface of chemically abnormal cells, plus a polymer known as PPE, or para-phenyleneethynylene. As the ‘check engine light,’ PPE fluoresces or glows when displaced from the nanoparticle surface.
By adding PPE bound with gold nanoparticles to human cells incubating in wells on a culture plate, the researchers induce a response called “competitive binding.” Cell surfaces bind the nanoparticles, displacing the PPE from the surface. This turns on PPE’s fluorescent switch. Cells are then identified from the patterns generated by different particle-PPE systems.
Rotello says the chemical nose approach is so named because it works like a human nose, which is arrayed with hundreds of very selective chemical receptors. These bind with thousands of different chemicals in the air, some more strongly than others, in the endless combination we encounter. The receptors report instantly to the brain, which recognizes patterns such as, for example, “French fries,” or it creates a new smell pattern.
Chemical receptors in the nose plus the brain’s pattern recognition skills together are incredibly sensitive at detecting subtly different combinations, Rotello notes. We routinely detect the presence of tiny numbers of bacteria in meat that’s going bad, for instance. Like a human nose, the chemical version being developed for use in cancer also remembers patterns experienced, even if only once, and creates a new one when needed.
For the future, Rotello says further studies will be undertaken in an animal model to see if the chemical nose approach can identify cell status in real tissue. Also, more work is required to learn how to train the chemical nose’s sensors to give more precise information to physicians who will be making judgment calls about patients’ cancer treatment. But the future is promising, he adds. “We’re getting complete identification now, and this can be improved by adding more and different nanoparticles. So far we’ve experimented with only three, and there are hundreds more we can make.”
An article describing Rotello and colleagues’ new chemical nose method of cancer detection appears in the June 23 issue of the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences online.
Currently, detecting cancer via cell surface biomarkers has taken what’s known as the “lock and key” approach. Drawbacks of this method include that foreknowledge of the biomarker is required. Also, as Rotello explains, a cancer cell has the same biomarkers on its surface as a healthy cell, but in different concentrations, a maddeningly small difference that can be very difficult to detect. “You often don’t get a big signal for the presence of cancer,” he notes. “It’s a subtle thing.”
He adds, “Our new method uses an array of sensors to recognize not only known cancer types, but it signals that abnormal cells are present. That is, the chemical nose can simply tell us something isn’t right, like a ‘check engine light,’ though it may never have encountered that type before.” Further, the chemical nose can be designed to alert doctors of the most invasive cancer types, those for which early treatment is crucial.
In blinded experiments in four human cancer cell lines (cervical, liver, testis and breast), as well as in three metastatic breast cell lines, and in normal cells, the new detection technique correctly indicated not only the presence of cancer cells in a sample but also identified primary cancer vs. metastatic disease.
In further experiments to rule out the possibility that the chemical nose had simply detected individual differences in cells from different donors, the researchers repeated the experiments in skin cells from three groups of cloned BALB /c mice: healthy animals, those with primary cancer and those with metastatic disease. Once again, it worked. “This result is key,” says Rotello. “It shows that we can differentiate between the the three cell types in a single individual using the chemical nose approach.”
Rotello’s research team, with colleagues at the Georgia Institute of Technology, designed the new detection system by combining three gold nanoparticles that have special affinity for the surface of chemically abnormal cells, plus a polymer known as PPE, or para-phenyleneethynylene. As the ‘check engine light,’ PPE fluoresces or glows when displaced from the nanoparticle surface.
By adding PPE bound with gold nanoparticles to human cells incubating in wells on a culture plate, the researchers induce a response called “competitive binding.” Cell surfaces bind the nanoparticles, displacing the PPE from the surface. This turns on PPE’s fluorescent switch. Cells are then identified from the patterns generated by different particle-PPE systems.
Rotello says the chemical nose approach is so named because it works like a human nose, which is arrayed with hundreds of very selective chemical receptors. These bind with thousands of different chemicals in the air, some more strongly than others, in the endless combination we encounter. The receptors report instantly to the brain, which recognizes patterns such as, for example, “French fries,” or it creates a new smell pattern.
Chemical receptors in the nose plus the brain’s pattern recognition skills together are incredibly sensitive at detecting subtly different combinations, Rotello notes. We routinely detect the presence of tiny numbers of bacteria in meat that’s going bad, for instance. Like a human nose, the chemical version being developed for use in cancer also remembers patterns experienced, even if only once, and creates a new one when needed.
For the future, Rotello says further studies will be undertaken in an animal model to see if the chemical nose approach can identify cell status in real tissue. Also, more work is required to learn how to train the chemical nose’s sensors to give more precise information to physicians who will be making judgment calls about patients’ cancer treatment. But the future is promising, he adds. “We’re getting complete identification now, and this can be improved by adding more and different nanoparticles. So far we’ve experimented with only three, and there are hundreds more we can make.”
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)