Science & Technology

Science and Technology
August 22, 2019Original Objective Articles / Science & TechnologyBy: Virgil Jacobs | Contributing AOJ Journalist   Antibiotics “Although initially it was the source of miraculous cures for a variety of infections that were previously difficult or impossible to treat, it was not long before the problem of resistance to antibiotics that had been developed occurred.” The rate of bacteria that is resistant to antibiotics has “Really increased to crisis level proportions” According to the collective minds of FDA Biologists, and Pherecydes Pharma. The real concern of modern medicine is bacteria becoming immune to the antibiotics we have, It’s a premonition to the fear that once held humanity in the dark ages. When bacteria ruled as our greatest enemy. Pharma’s goal is to take bacteria’s worst enemy against it, the phages. Pharma is an organization determined to “explore the use of phage therapy to treat complicated urinary tract infections,” Which has had successful cases. What are bacteriophages? (with the help of “https://youtu.be/YI3tsmFsrOg“)   Bacteriophages are microscopic organisms with the following anatomy: an isotopic-shaped head, a ring around the stem known as a collar, a tube structure that connects the head to the bottom called a sheath, which then connects to a flat disc called the baseplate, below that, there are tiny spikes that are used to latch onto the desired target, then six tail fibers. The Phage is a Virus; its purpose is to find bacteria and connect itself to it, then implant replication of itself in order to kill the bacteria, as well as further the species. The Potential Application of Bacteriophages   Something to be noted is that the Soviet Union actually practiced using viruses to cure infections; the reason is because of the Berlin Wall, Western medicine, which had been more advanced, was not able to reach or be obtained by the Soviets. “In a post-antibiotic world, infection cures you!” The practice has been used, however, at a very minimum version since “water from certain rivers could cure infectious diseases like leprosy and cholera.” Scientists then, after all this time, in the 1900’s to now were curious and took another look; they found certain microscopic organisms, ones like the phage that would actually find the infection in a person and destroy it. The organisms would target certain bacteria that it liked the most, or which it’s designed to destroy. Typically, this is what would happen; however, it is possible that these microorganisms could also become our greatest enemy, and it’s something we must be prepared for if we take phages and other types of organisms just as we view antibiotics. The genetics need to be analyzed, if phages or other organisms are planned to be used as a replacement for antibiotics, their evolution patterns and factors will need to be certain in understanding, if not, there is going to be an uncertain outcome to what might happen if they’re used. Say someone has a urinary tract infection, just as the pharmacy agency focuses on, what will happen if the phages evolve to perhaps target our cells instead of ignore them? The consequences would be unknown, and not good for our species. Using the single example of phages: Their process has been defined as finding the disease or bacteria that they are designed to target. After that, the phages will hold onto their victim with their tail fibers. The phage then moves down towards the bacteria and connects the spikes that are below the stem of the phage. Next, the phage will inject other phages into the bacteria until it becomes so compressed it explodes, releasing more phages in the process. This could be incredibly dangerous if the genetic code of the microorganism will learn to target people. Perhaps killing our cells and immune system, depending on what they evolved to do. Another factor is that it also is reliant on the history of the genome of phages; a certain genome may be historically only able to attack one species, and it will most likely evolve to combat that species of bacteria more effectively. The danger should be reduced if this train of thought is proved as accurate. All that we have for now are assumptions based on evolution theory and vague practices.  The problem with antibiotics, isn’t necessarily the drugs, rather the bugs! “Every year, about 2 million people get sick from superbugs.” Superbugs are categorized as bacteria that are resistant to most commonly used antibiotics. The name is more or less known by the public as “cannot be killed using multiple antibiotics” right now. If you visit the doctor, you usually expect antibiotics to solve the sickness you have. An example of a strain of superbug is MRSA (Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus). Many of the drugs made to combat MRSA, the superbug has become immune to, such as “Methicillin, Amoxicillin, Penicillin, Oxacillin, and other common antibiotics known as cephalosporins.” MRSA does this by activating a certain gene, in this case, the mecA gene. This gene focuses on making certain codes that will protect the bacteria directly from the antibiotic; it was able to evolve due to the amount of antibiotics being used, and able to combat antibiotics after being able to learn their structure. This may be in part due to the amount of antibiotics used, in 2015, “269 million antibiotic prescriptions were distributed to patients through outpatient pharmacies in the US.” Evolution of the Multi-resistant drug.   Vertical Transmission is when the parent of a child has a disease and then passes it on to the child because of the genetic transmission between them. It gives the Superbug a chance to evolve because of its host. The environment that the strain is engulfed in will determine the options that the superbug has to make itself mutate, instead of just randomly waiting to mutate itself. If the father and/or mother hold a resistant gene type, then there is an opening where the Superbug can obtain that resistant gene while generations move further, and thus, there’s more chances for the superbug to obtain resistance.    Horizontal Transfer is the transmission of diseases from one person to another, or perhaps one to a group. It’s done through certain contacts such as bodily liquids including blood. These two things open up a door for the Superbug(s). Plasmids, which are certain types of liquids, are observed to contain more than one gene type that codes and forms resistance. By coming into contact with this, The Superbug(s) might gain even more resistance to the antibiotics by absorbing the strains that have defensive capabilities and code. This is and will be a major problem, superbugs will continue to grow and multiply, and will slowly become more dangerous as time goes on. Simply, from the amount of antibiotics, the need for natural selection will become pressured to create even more resistance in mutation, transmissions and transfers in genetics.     According to “https://health.ucsd.edu/news/releases/pages/2017-04-25-novel-phage-therapy-saves-patient-with-multidrug-resistant-bacterial-infection.aspx”,  Patterson was a 69 year old Professor, He was traveling for thanksgiving in Egypt, and according to reports, he was “wracked by abdominal pain, fever, nausea, vomiting, and a racing heartbeat.” The report on his illness said he had pancreatitis. But “Standard treatment didn’t help” His physical body was feeling fatigued and his mental state kept worsening based on the pain.  When he was transferred to Frankfurt Germany Dec. 3, 2015. He was then diagnosed with Acinetobacter baumannii, but It had evolved and morphed into a Multi-Resistant superbug, which was immune to the antibiotics made to cure it. During a long, pain-filled experience he was asked by his wife Strathdee if he wanted to try phage therapy. “In Patterson’s case, the phages were introduced through catheters into his abdominal cavity and intravenously to address a broader, systemic infection, which had not been done in the antibiotic era in the U.S.” After three days of undergoing the phage therapy, he awoke from the coma that the bacteria put him in. Apparently, after being cured by IV Phage Therapy, “Tom woke up, turned to his daughter and said, ‘I love you’, recalled Schooley.” Conclusion The future of antibiotics may be fading with the way things are heading in the world of superbugs today. Superbugs are becoming more advanced every day, and the antibiotics stay the same. Even if doctors were to find breakthrough after breakthrough in the field of antibiotics, the bacteria would by natural selection become more dangerous, as well as in an idle state become more powerful through genetic transfers and transmissions. Phages and other microorganisms might be the key to solving this issue, an issue that is growing rapidly and becoming more of an epidemic with each passing day. The call to do something is becoming too great to ignore phages and other types of treatment besides antibiotics. The threat is looming and research is growing to supply that demand. The next step is close, but Humanity doesn’t know where we’ll place it.  Citations Shiel Jr., W. C. (2018, December 27). Definition of Vertical transmission. Retrieved from https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=7982  LaFee, S., & Buschman, H. (2017, April 25). Novel Phage Therapy Saves Patient with Multidrug-Resistant Bacterial Infection. Retrieved from https://health.ucsd.edu/news/releases/pages/2017-04-25-novel-phage-therapy-saves-patient-with-multidrug-resistant-bacterial-infection.aspx  Mercedes Transcription Inc. (2018, May 21). How Many Antibiotics Are Prescribed Each Year in the US. Retrieved from https://www.mercedestranscription.com/how-many-antibiotics-are-prescribed-each-year-in-the-us/  Understanding Evolution. (2008, April). Superbug, super-fast evolution. Retrieved from https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/news/080401_mrsa  Glass, R. G. (n.d.). Why is MRSA an antibiotic resistant infection? Retrieved from https://www.sharecare.com/health/mrsa-staph-skin-infection/mrsa-an-antibiotic-resistant-infection  Stapleton, P. D., & Taylor, P. W. (2007, November 7). Methicillin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus: mechanisms and modulation. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2065735/  WebMD. (n.d.). Understanding MRSA Infection. Retrieved from https://www.webmd.com/skin-problems-and-treatments/understanding-mrsa#1  Miller, K. (2015, April 17). Superbugs: What They Are and How You Get Them. Retrieved from https://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/news/20150417/superbugs-what-they-are#1  Sifferlin, A. (2017, December 18). This Last-Resort Medical Treatment Offers Hope in the Fight Against Superbugs. Retrieved from https://time.com/5068513/superbugs-are-nearly-impossible-to-fight/ [...]
August 15, 2019Original Objective Articles / Science & TechnologyBy: Virgil Jacobs | Contributing AOJ Journalist Anesthesia is made to create a lack of connection between the brain and body’s pain receptors and signals. Typically, the human brain would be able to remember events or flashes, certain things would stick with you by memory of association. But in the state of “Anesthesia” it is completely interrupted so that one can’t recall their procedure at all; people can’t feel pain during said operations as well. Yet, some people have reactions to anesthesia. Reactions can vary from complete loss of control that spin a person into a daze of swinging their fists, OR to the simple effect of being a little dizzy. It makes people wonder what is in anesthesia, as well as raise some morality issues people may have. This is a question that sticks with people when someone close to them, or themselves, have been through the rough side of anesthesia. How much does the public really know?   Typically, the two main sources that anesthesia is administered would be Intravaineus (through the veins) or by inhalation. Intravaineus is a technique in which the IV of an individual is filled with a specified dose and/or type. Which further confuses the general public. There are different types of anesthesia? It ranges from the most common type “General Anesthesia” to “Regional Anesthetics”. The common type is defined by the conglomerate that Doctors or Physicians will use most frequently throughout their practice. However, the first distinction one needs to make and understand completely is that all types of anesthesia ARE NOT one medication; anesthesia is a combined bunch of different medications. However, the goal of these collective drugs is to achieve the anesthesia state, which is again, a complete lack of consciousness and feeling depending on the type. Immobility would be another goal to add to that list, since having a moving piece of body, or some strange moving reaction would cause immense problems and difficulty during the assigned procedure. Other variations of Anesthesia have specific uses, however, consisting of leg, spinal, neck, and ear Anesthesia. Ranging from these examples to a great variety of the human body, these are all called Regional Anesthetics. How? Doctors are still puzzled on how anesthesia achieves this state, and or how it works. But licensed anesthesiologists must monitor the patient, and this is how the risk from anesthesia will be limited. First off, what is an EKG? EKG(The Electrocardiogram) is a device that measures the rhythm and general health of the heart. It is one of the most important machines for the duties of the anesthesiologist. It makes sure the heart is correctly beating, and correctly pumping. It was proven that several common types of anesthetics have a common system of connecting themselves to the GABAa Receptor in the brain’s neurons. They hold the gateway between the nervous system and brain open, which allows negatively charged particles to get through the once closed gateway, which is made directly to open and close based on the negative charge. Once through, the negative charges fill up the gateway, and build up. This keeps the brain from getting electrical signals from neurons. There is an abundance of these sort of bridges in the nervous system; They typically control the movement, consciousness, and memory of an individual. Generally, anesthetics apply themselves to more than just one of these bridges, and or sections of the nervous system. Yet, Anesthesia can still as well affect the major organs.  An anesthesiologist has a complex job. There are dangers to modern medicine, serious and life threatening consequences. Medications must be carefully mixed and/or balanced to achieve that state of anesthesia, and the patient must be monitored with said vital readings and machinery. Not only must an anesthesiologist just apply the drugs and hope that the drugs will react well with the patient, but must also literally change the mixtures as needed on the spot. During the operation, there is immense confusion within this thought. Every patient has different reactions and different levels of everything, which makes the job that much harder.   The administration of anesthesia is chosen by a few parameters, such as, if the operations duration is greater than 2 or 3 hours, if your surgery contains the risk of breathing problems during the procedure, if the problem that the patient needs the surgeon to cover is a large portion of their body, if the operation details are demanding to touch and/or operate on important organs, and if the procedure would cause you to lose a great amount of blood. It is then up to the anesthesiologists to determine what medications to combine, and how much of that said combination will be needed to get the patient into a “medically induced coma”.  The coma, however, reacts with the patient to make him/her stable, the outcome of the coma is unknown. Doctors have said to people that changes from the effects of anesthesia could be permanent, which has scared many people. The Outcome of anesthesia isn’t really known. The properties and reactions that create this outcome is generally just a mystery. As said before, One could hallucinate while coming out of the state, or be completely fine. Physicians and anesthesiologists are still unsure on what determines these things, which makes anesthesia very strange.  According to “https://www.asahq.org/whensecondscount/anesthesia-101/effects-of-anesthesia/“ Side effects of Anesthesia can happen during or after the procedure. After the use of general anesthesia, side effects known to be caused are the following: Nausea and Vomiting: the first few days, out of general anesthesia. It is due to some medications mixing with the crumbs of anesthesia, and movement after the surgery.Sore throat: the tube that was mentioned earlier, that the anesthesiologist must insert into your throat, can cause redness and pain after the surgery is over.Post-operative delirium: controlling your consciousness and regaining it is quite difficult in an environment your not familiar with, like when waking from general anesthesia, but this is mostly applied to the older generation; since older people are more susceptible to these kind of mental effects due to age. But typically, if the patient after surgery would do something normally as they would do in daily life, it has been noticed by scientists to improve coming back to the senses, an example would be wearing your glasses, hearing aids, etc.Muscle aches: the cause of this would be perhaps the medicine that the anesthesiologist diagnosed to relax your muscles, as well as, the previously mentioned breathing tube that is used to help the patient breath under anesthesia could make your throat sore too. Itching is a fairly common thing to have after using narcotics, which is classified as “sometimes” used in general anesthesia to remove pain from the individual. Chills and shivering, because after the cold surgery room, and general exposure to the body, patients can wake up with hypothermia. To prevent this, most people are given a heated blanket after surgery..   There are 4 actual stages to anesthesia from “https://www.medicaldaily.com/dazed-sedated-and-confused-why-does-anesthesia-make-us-act-way-we-do-269881” These stages define the process of anesthesia as well as what happens during it.  Stage 1: Induction is defined as the period when patients are barely feeling effects, however not unconscious.Stage 2: Excitement, unconscious with slight twitching, and the breathing of the patient is normal.Stage 3: “Anesthesieized” when the patient has become completely taken over by the state of anesthesia.Stage 4: Emergency which is not in the safe process. It occurs in an error of drug balancing, usually when the patient comes out with brain damage or perhaps even death; a drug overdose. Anesthesia is an interesting bundle of medical information, for the betterment of surgery purposes. To keep the patient from feeling pain, waking up, and any other problem that could arise from surgery. The actual procedure to keep anesthesia working and starting said technique, is what doctors understand. But how the state is achieved and why this state happens is still a mystery to this day. Anesthesia has side effects though, some that could be permanent, and it’s something that doctors, and patients, should be aware of, and ready to face the consequences. However, the cases of this happening are few. Doctors don’t understand why people have certain reactions. All people should know this before being given surgery, and giving surgery. To become aware of this is a vital step in knowledge for the public, and good preparation for future reference, or for looking over the past. WebMD. (n.d.). What Is General Anesthesia? Retrieved from https://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/what-is-general-anesthesia#1 TahoeDoc. (2017, April 19). How Does Anesthesia Affect the Body? Retrieved from https://healthproadvice.com/procedures/How-Does-Anesthesia-Affect-the-Body Bushak, L. (2014, February 21). Dazed, Sedated, And Confused: Why Does Anesthesia Make Us Act The Way We Do? Retrieved from https://www.medicaldaily.com/dazed-sedated-and-confused-why-does-anesthesia-make-us-act-way-we-do-269881 American Society of Anesthesiologists. (n.d.). Effects of Anesthesia on Brain & Body. Retrieved from https://www.asahq.org/whensecondscount/anesthesia-101/effects-of-anesthesia/ [...]
August 6, 2019Original Opinionated Articles / Science & TechnologyBy: Gittan Alicia | Contributing AOJ Journalist Nanobots are an exemplary example of sci-fi becoming a reality. We’ve all seen the movies where tiny robots, so small we can’t even see them, either help in some way or cause massive destruction. A prime example of this in a movie would be the movie Stargate Atlantis, where the main characters run into a world entirely made of nanobots, and in such world, the nanobots seek to kill the main characters. That is not exactly what today’s molecular engineers are aiming for in their development of nanotechnology, but it certainly is an inspiration and a driving factor for peoples fear of the development of the technology               Despite the often-nightmarish depiction of nanobots brought about in the sci-fi world, molecular engineers and bioengineers foresee several positive aspects in nanorobotics. In Eric Drexler’s book, Engines of Creation, Drexler outlines possible implications of nanobots in medicine, economy, and the environment. Others involved in the field of nanotechnology foresee nanobots in use for cancer treatment, drug delivery mechanisms, medical imaging, new sensing devices, and several other applications. Perhaps the most exciting and feared potential application of nanobots out of them all is the use of nanobots as replicators. In which case, nanobots would be used “to guide chemical reactions by positioning reactive molecules with atomic precision” according to an article from singularity hub by Peter H. Diamandis. This idea of replication through nanobots is a common them in sic-fi and has driven fear over the development of nanotechnology. Most famously, sci-fi has depicted the world’s end through a scenario known as the gray goo scenario.               The grey goo, or gray goo, scenario was coined by Eric Drexler in his book Engines of Creation. The scenario, as described by Drexler, entails self-replicating nanobots that spin out of control, destroying the Earth’s biosphere by consuming all the materials necessary for life to replicate themselves. All that would be left after such destruction is conceptualized by Drexler as gray goo, hence the name the gray goo scenario. While this scenario at first glance seems quite impossible and purely sci-fi, Drexler brings the possibility of such in reality to light by describing recent advances in nanotechnology that could make replication by nanobots a reality.               A subfield of nanotechnology known as molecular electronics could allow for the manipulation of matter at the molecular and atomic level by changing individual molecules into circuit elements. This along with advances in physical sciences and genetics would have the potential to make replication through nanobots a reality with endless possibilities for application in the real world. However, with such possibility comes risk and fear, which is where the gray goo scenario comes into play. It’s because of this that several individuals involved in nanorobotics have proposed how situations like the gray goo would be avoided.               In hopes of controlling the potential future self-replicating nanobots, several suggestions for control have been put forward. Such ideas include limits on nanobot’s replicative capacity; operational energy and chemical requirements; use of rare elements not found or exceedingly insignificant in a human’s bloodstream; vigilant monitoring for destructive behavior of self-replication; and several others. All of these proposed controls may be effective against a potential gray goo scenario should nanobots ever be developed, but, as with all technology, there will surely be other unforeseen issues with the technology. However, the outcome of such issues likely won’t be near as detrimental as sci-fi has made others like the gray goo out to be. In fact, the positive aspects and potential use for nanobots may just outweigh the faults that arise, and several other fields of use for nanobots outside of replication are often overlooked due to over-focus on the common replicator theme of nanobots in sci-fi.               Remaining in the field of replication for the use of nanobots, nanobots could be exceedingly beneficial in manufacturing. With nanobots, the cost of most manufactured products, especially complex products like computer chips, could be reduced toward the bottom limit, close to the cost of the raw materials for the product. Not only that, but nanobots could replicate themselves and create other nanofactories as needed, producing even more nanofactory products at a much lower price, with greater precision, and greater efficiency than our current factories. Industrial waste would also be greatly reduced, if not eliminated, due to the atomic precision of nanobots. The nanobots would be able to organize all atoms either into a product or into properly packaged waste, and thus prevent pollution from being released into the environment. That’s just a few advantages of nanobots in manufacturing and replication.               There’s also great potential for the use of nanobots in medicine. With atomic precision, medical nanorobots could be released into the human body to cure specific diseases through surgery, repair injuries, protect the body against injuries, reverse the effects of aging, and several other possibilities. However, nanobots could also have negative effects on people should they be used as biomedical weapons. Just as nanorobots could have the potential to heal, there would be nothing preventing them from having the potential to harm or kill should they fall into the hands of the wrong people or the military.                A very unique and potentially very beneficial impact of nanorobotics could be the use of nanobots for energy. Nanotechnology has the potential to save energy through weight reduction of vehicles and optimized function of several energy-consuming products. For instance, nanotechnologically optimized materials like plastics or metals with carbon nanotubes could optimize cars and planes to be lighter and just as strong, thus reducing fuel consumption. An example where nanobots could be used and are working on being used is to optimize products and save energy, would be with lighting materials for light bulbs.  Nanobots could add nanoscale layers of plastic and organic pigments which could change the conversion from energy to light in a light bulb from 5% to up to 50%, thus saving energy.               Most of our storage today actually includes nanotechnology, which most are unaware of because we can’t see it. Nanotechnology is used in several common technologies for storing data today and plays a key role in their function. For instance, flash storage media utilizes quantum mechanics and nanotechnology to save and delete data. In the future, nanotechnology may be used to condense storage space even further, as more and more storage is becoming necessary for companies generating massive amounts of data. In fact, physicist Dr. Sander Otte has already experimented with the possibility of data storage through the use of the atom through an experiment involving chlorine atoms. In such experiment, he created a two-dimensional array by having chlorine atoms arrange themselves on a flat copper surface. Other techniques for storing data in more condensed techniques have also been developed experimentally, like the use of nanomagnets. However, Dr. Sander Otte’s technique and other data storage experiments have come with flaws that would make them impractical or even impossible to use.               It’s hard to tell where nanotechnology will take us in the future, or if our sci-fi based fears of nanobots are anywhere close to what the reality of nanobots may be. For all we know, nanobots may never actually be developed if something else is discovered that would be more efficient and effective than the wonder of the nanobot that we’ve all become so awed by in television. Not only that, but nanobot technology is far from becoming a reality, currently the only applicable breakthroughs in nanotech have been minor, and we don’t possess the technology to develop nanobots with the same features we see in sci-fi. We’ll just have to see where the exponential curve of technology takes us in the coming years to really find out. Diamandis, P. H. (2016, May 16). Nanorobots: Where We Are Today and Why Their Future Has Amazing Potential. Retrieved from https://singularityhub.com/2016/05/16/nanorobots-where-we-are-today-and-why-their-future-has-amazing-potential/ Gregersen, E., & Francis, S. (2016, August 1). Grey goo. Retrieved August 6, 2019, from https://www.britannica.com/technology/grey-goo Nanofactories. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://foresight.org/nano/nanofactories.html Berger, M. (2015, July 23). Nanotechnology and energy – a path to a sustainable future. Retrieved from https://www.nanowerk.com/spotlight/spotid=40843.php Nuncic, M. (2018, November 1). How nanotechnology could change data storage in the future. Retrieved from https://www.ontrack.com/blog/2018/11/01/how-nanotechnology-changes-data-storage-in-the-future/ [...]
August 5, 2019Original Objective Articles / Science & TechnologyBy: Gittan Alicia | Contributing AOJ Journalist               Most technophobia in society has always been unrealistic sci-fi based superstition, however, there has been some technophobia society was right about. Most of us are fixated on how the fear of technological advancement by people in the past has been overexaggerated. We’ve forgotten about the times society was right about fearing the threats imposed by new technology. There have been several times where society was right that the negative effects of technology would outweigh the advantages the technology brings. The Atomic Bomb               The atomic bomb was first created in the year 1945 with the intent scientific experimentation, however, the first theorems on “Nuclear Fissure” were discovered by Albert Einstein. Before and after the atomic bomb’s completion, several individuals involved in the development and use of the atomic bomb began regretting the bomb’s creation and use. Many were overcome with guilt over the use and plausible future destruction of the atomic bomb.               While there’s no individual “atomic bomb inventor”, there is an individual known as the “father of the atomic bomb” for leading the Manhattan project. Julius Robert Oppenheimer was the “father of the atomic bomb”, but as soon as he saw the first successful trial of the atomic bomb at the famous trinity test site, he began regretting his work in creating it, and such regret progressed as time went on. Years after the first successful test of the atomic bomb, Oppenheimer would recall thinking, “Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds” when he saw the trial. After Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Oppenheimer fell into deep regret over his creation due to the future harm he foresaw. Oppenheimer went so far as to tell president Truman, “Mr. President, I feel I have blood on my hands.” Oppenheimer was referring to blood on his hands from future deaths that could result from the atomic bomb.               Albert Einstein, arguably the most famous scientist and mathematician in history, only made small contributions to the actual development of the atomic bomb. Einstein laid out some fundamental concepts including coming up with the relativity theory and stating that a small amount of matter could release a large amount of energy. Such concepts are the only ways Einstein contributed to the atomic bomb scientifically, but not the only way he contributed to the atomic bomb. Einstein signed a letter to encourage president Truman to develop the atomic bomb. However, Einstein later came to deeply regret supporting the bomb’s development, stating, “”Had I known that the Germans would not succeed in producing an atomic bomb, I would have never lifted a finger.”               Member of the Franck Committee involved in the development of the atomic bomb quickly came to regret their creation when they figured out what the bomb would be used for. At first many members of the committee were eager to develop the bomb to use against Germany, but once the target switched to Japan, they began to protest. Such protests were ignored by the US government, and the bombings still took place in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The realization by members of the committee and the change of target that they couldn’t stop demonstrates how powerful weapons like the atomic bomb have the potential to cause ruin in ways mankind doesn’t foresee.               The fear and guilt expressed by many towards the atomic bomb was justifiable and still is today. For the first time in human history, a weapon with the potential to wipe out the entire human race was created. Even today, all it takes is one misinterpreted threat from a nation with nuclear weapons to set off nuclear warfare and vast amounts of death. Such has almost occurred in the past several times, for instance, once a flock of migrating Canadian geese was mistaken as a Soviet bomber attack in the 1950’s. Ham, P. (2015, August 5). As Hiroshima Smouldered, Our Atom Bomb Scientists Suffered Remorse. Retrieved from https://www.newsweek.com/hiroshima-smouldered-our-atom-bomb-scientists-suffered-remorse-360125 Valiunas, A. (2006). The Agony of Atomic Genius. Retrieved from https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-agony-of-atomic-genius Mental Floss UK. (2015, August 4). 10 Inventors Who Came to Regret Their Creations. Retrieved from http://mentalfloss.com/uk/history/27802/10-inventors-who-came-to-regret-their-creations “Who Invented the Atomic Bomb?” History on the Net © 2000-2019, Salem Media. August 5, 2019 https://www.historyonthenet.com/who-invented-the-atomic-bomb Marshall, S., & Toma, A. (2012, May 23). The close calls: how false alarms triggered fears of nuclear war. Retrieved from https://livableworld.org/the-close-calls-how-false-alarms-triggered-fears-of-nuclear-war/ Nuclear Power Plants               Nuclear power plants are a cheaper, more efficient, and environmentally friendly way to produce electricity. However, nuclear power plants involve a great deal of risk with their extensive amounts of radiation and the massive amount of energy atoms release. There have also been several nuclear power plant disasters with effects that outweighed the original benefits of nuclear power plants. Effects from such disasters have included radioactive wasteland, the loss of several lives, and the expense from nuclear destruction.               Nuclear disaster Chernobyl is perhaps the most famous nuclear incident to ever occur and has even had a widely popular movie created about it. The incident of Chernobyl occurred in 1986 during a power surge that resulted from a reactor systems test, which caused an explosion and fire that destroyed Unit 4. From this incident, a great amount of radiation escaped and spread across the Western Soviet Union and Europe and 220,000 people had to be relocated from their homes. Such spread of radiation has had several negative effects on the ecosystem, including the death of pine forests close to Chernobyl.               The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster is another well-known nuclear incident. In March of 2011 an Earthquake and tsunami struck Japan. The natural disasters managed to cut off external power to the reactors and disable the back-up diesel generators, thus resulting in the exhaustion of battery power and incapacitating the cooling systems. The result was overheating fuel in the reactor cores that led to hydrogen explosions and radiation contamination in wide areas surrounding the power plant. Over 100,000 people ended up needing to be evacuated and for several years the environment around Fukushima was uninhabitable due to radiation.               There are several other examples that illustrate the dangers of nuclear power plants. But with the two instances shown, one can see how the risks and disasters of nuclear power plants can outweigh their initial advantages. Therefore, it’s important to note that while the initial benefits of nuclear power can be attractive, one must account for the detrimental effects that could result from an incident. Dadiverina, A. (2016, December 8). Chernobyl effects on humans, animals and nature in area. Retrieved from https://chernobylguide.com/chernobyl_effects/ World Nuclear Association. (2018, October). Fukushima Daiichi Accident. Retrieved August 5, 2019, from http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/fukushima-accident.aspx Union of Concerned Scientists. (n.d.). A Brief History of Nuclear Accidents Worldwide. Retrieved August 5, 2019, from https://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-power/nuclear-power-accidents/history-nuclear-accidents Chemical Weapons               Chemicals were first utilized as weapons by the Germans in WWI when Fritz Haber oversaw the first use of chlorine gas at Ypres. The chlorine gas would appear in a greenish-yellow gas that smelled of bleach and at high enough doses would kill. From this point onwards, chemical weapons would become widely used in warfare and Fritz Haber would infamously become known as the “father of chemical warfare”.               Despite prohibition, as time progressed chemicals continued to be used and improved upon in warfare. Following chlorine gas was the development of phosgene gas. Phosgene was especially deadly because it was colorless and soldiers wouldn’t know they received a deadly dose until after a day or two when their lungs were filled with fluid and they suffocated, a painful death. Following phosgene gas was mustard gas, perhaps the most commonly used gas in chemical warfare. Mustard gas was a powerful blistering agents that had a potent smell and hours after exposure would cause blistering in moist areas that would pop and become infected. The highest number of casualties from chemical weapons were caused by mustard gas.               Due to the lethality, brutality and immense suffering caused by chemicals in warfare, soldiers were often terrified of chemical warfare. Public outrage built up about chemical warfare and eventually the Geneva Protocol was put in place. However, this protocol had many shortcomings and was generally disregarded. It wasn’t until the Chemical Weapon Convention that chemical warfare was finally brought under control. Even today, people still remember chemical warfare, especially in trench warfare, as a dreadful time. Scientist Mind. (2018, May 28). Scientists who regretted their inventions. Retrieved from http://www.lbjhs.net/scientists-who-regretted-their-inventions/ United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs. (n.d.). Chemical Weapons. Retrieved August 5, 2019, from https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/chemical/ Grojek, W., & Coelho, C. (2018, April 22). Chemical Weapons: A Deadly History. Retrieved August 5, 2019, from https://www.rferl.org/a/history-of-chemical-weapons/29184063.html Conclusion          These are just a few of many invention people were right to fear in the past. Even today many of them still pose a threat. With nuclear bombs all it takes is one mistake or miscommunication and there could be full on nuclear war all throughout the world. Nuclear power plants pose a threat today due to their high risk and dangers, all it takes is carelessness from a few employees or a natural disaster and a nuclear power plant accident could take place. Chemical weapons still pose a threat too, they could easily be utilized by terrorists or wrongfully used in warfare by any particular country. These are all potential threats, and due to past and current circumstances, it’s justifiable for people to fear them. [...]
June 30, 2019Original Objective Articles / Science & Technology              Have you ever feared technology, perhaps you may have feared the effects technology might bring to your friends, family, or even society? The generalizing term for this “Fear” Would be Technophobia. In essence, technophobia is a fear of new technology and has occurred all throughout history. Technophobia was common in the Greek and Anglo-Saxon times and is even prevalent in today’s largely tech-based society. In fact, it seems that as technology advances, technophobia among the peoples of society increases too. Writing for Everyone               Believe it or not, writing, something most of us take for granted, was feared upon its first introduction to society as a whole. In fact, the idea of writing being allowed for everyone is still feared by some in certain parts of the world. When writing was first introduced into society, it was commonly only available to the upper classes and men. It was a common belief in early societies that men were superior to women and therefore should be the ones who receive an education to read in write. This belief, known as patriarchy, is still existent in certain cultures.               In North East Nigeria, women are often denied access to education due to cultural beliefs about the women’s role in society. Extremists like Boko Haram make the situation far worse for Nigerian women by leading efforts to prevent women from receiving education. The Boko Haram extremist group makes such efforts out of religious belief. They fear women’s education and literacy because they consider it a violation of their Islamic religion.               Not only was writing feared by individuals due to religious or cultural purposes; writing was feared for its effects on society as a whole. This was a fear common among those who were accustomed to teaching by word. Socrates, for instance, “was anxious about the emerging power of the written word over face-to-face contact.” Doesn’t that sound familiar? Socrates’ fear of written word reducing face-to-face contact is the same as the fear of phones replacing face-to-face contact expressed by many in today’s society. This goes to show how all innovations and technology, even that of writing, induce fear among individuals of society. Citations: ISS Today. (2018, April 16). ISS Today: Africa needs a revolution in education. Retrieved from https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2018-04-16-africa-needs-a-revolution-in-education/#.WuiGK9PwbdcCNN Library. (2019, May 21). Boko Haram Fast Facts. Retrieved June 27, 2019, from https://www.cnn.com/2014/06/09/world/boko-haram-fast-facts/index.html The Printing Press               Before the invention of the printing press at about 1440CE, monks would make copies of books by handwriting copies themselves. Therefore, the printing press was considered a threat to the copying business the monks were involved in. The monks themselves feared the printing press because they would be out of the copying business, and others feared the printing press because they believed monks would become lazy without the task of copying texts. Johannes Trithemius, a German Benedictine Abbot, stated, “For monks, labor was part and parcel of devotion, and if you weren’t good at writing, you could do binding, or painting, or for heaven’s sake practice. And it goes even further: the labor of manuscript writing was something for monks to do — for there was no greater danger for the devout soul than idleness.” It’s apparent from this quote that Trithemius feared the printing press because he thought monks would become lazy. Of course, the monks never actually became lazy from the invention of the printing press; monks simply moved on to carry out other tasks. The same has occurred with other new inventions throughout history, people simply adapt to the new technology and focus on other tasks. Citations: Hughes, B. (2010, October 17). Socrates ? a man for our times. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/books/2010/oct/17/socrates-philosopher-man-for-our-timesMasnik, M. (2011, February 25). A Fifteenth Century Technopanic About The Horrors Of The Printing Press. Retrieved from https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110119/05022912725/fifteenth-century-technopanic-about-horrors-printing-press.shtml Trains               Like many inventions in today’s world, trains were feared for their possible effects on health. When trains were invented, they were the fastest form of transportation that had ever been seen. This simple factor of speed led people to fear trains because they thought traveling so fast was unnatural and harmful for the human body.               Unsurprisingly, there was a Victorian belief that train speed and movement would drive some men insane. Such men that went crazy on the trains were known as railway madmen. It was said that these men would be perfectly normal until the train started moving, and then they would become uncivil and dangerous to the people around them. The idea of the railway madmen was particularly unnerving during Victorian times because the carriages were locked for privacy reasons, meaning people could be trapped inside with the madmen. Citations: Hayes, J. (2017, May 12). The Victorian Belief That a Train Ride Could Cause Instant Insanity. Retrieved from https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/railway-madness-victorian-trains Radio               The radio was an invention that came to be feared by not only the masses but by its very own inventor. While the idea of an inventor fearing their own invention sounds concerning and strange, quite a few inventors have actually feared their own inventions. In inventor Guglielmo Marconi’s case, he had believed his radio technology was perfected in 1895, but approximately 20 years later radio technology was altered to broadcast to the masses. Marconi had only intended for his radio to be used to improve communications between ships at sea. When he discovered his radio technology was being used to broadcast to the masses he asked: “Have I done the world good, or have I added a menace?”               The masses, on the other hand, feared radio for its distraction to the minds of the young. It was commonly believed that children were being distracted from schoolwork by the excitement of the radio, and therefore, children’s performance in school was diminishing. A 1985 magazine known as gramophone expanded upon such an idea, claiming radio programs were offsetting the balance of children’s easily excitable minds. Similar accusations have been made by the masses and the media towards other communication technologies. Citations: Bell, V. (2010, February 15). A history of media technology scares, from the printing press to Facebook. Retrieved from https://slate.com/technology/2010/02/a-history-of-media-technology-scares-from-the-printing-press-to-facebook.html Wilson, L. (n.d.). 11 Examples of Fear and Suspicion Of New Technology. Retrieved June 27, 2019, from https://lenwilson.us/11-examples-of-fear-and-suspicion-of-new-technology/Danielle, T. (n.d.). 9 Irrational Panics From History About “Crazy” Technology That We Use Everyday Now. Retrieved June 27, 2019, from https://www.ranker.com/list/historical-freak-outs-about-new-technology/taeyura Cars               Only a century ago were cars introduced to society and the fear among the masses about their introduction at the time is opposite of the fear among the masses about self-driving cars. The fear among the masses about cars both 100 years ago and now is largely based on what people are accustomed too. People in the 1890’s were accustomed to the horse-drawn carriage, and people today are accustomed to having full control over a car.               The people of the 1890’s feared cars due to the fact that they are driven by people with no aid of another intelligence. With the horse-drawn carriage, the people liked the secondary intelligence of the horse because where people failed, horses would act to help avoid collisions. Therefore, the people feared there would be significantly greater collision and death with cars. However, people didn’t seem to account for the fact that the car has brakes and driving a horse-drawn carriage requires much more attention by the driver to the vehicle and horses.               Today’s society fears the idea of self-driving vehicles because the driver no longer has control of the vehicle. Instead, the computer drives using artificial intelligence and algorithms to avoid collisions and obey traffic laws. People fear the artificial intelligence of self-driving cars won’t be able to account for enough, making the self-driving vehicles less safe than people-operated cars. The increased focus by the media on incidents with the new self-driving car technology has also contributed to the fear being expressed by society. Citations: Naughton, K. (2019, March 14). Bloomberg. Retrieved June 27, 2019, from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-14/americans-still-fear-self-driving-carsAnslow, L. (2016, November 3). Forget self-driving car anxiety: In the early days human drivers were the fear. Retrieved from https://timeline.com/forget-self-driving-car-anxiety-in-the-early-days-human-drivers-were-the-fear-55a770262c10 The Telephone               Imagine being able to use telephones to communicate with the dead. While that sounds like a wild and impossible idea, when telephones were first introduced to society it was believed by some that telephones would eventually be used to communicate with the dead. This simple suggestion that telephones could be used to communicate with the dead struck fear into the hearts of a few.               On a wider scale, telephones were feared by the public due to their electrical components. People thought that if “they stood near… in a thunderstorm they might get hit by lightning.” There didn’t even need to be a storm for people to fear being shocked by a telephone. In fact, people feared the electrical wiring of the telephone could electrocute them               Another fear of the telephone we are all aware of today is the fear of society becoming anti-social due to a lesser need for interaction in person. While such fear at the time turned out to be true to some degree, the integration of the telephone into society has not wiped face-to-face interaction off the face of the earth. People have found phones to be more of a tool to extend interaction with people when they’re not with them than to be a means of avoiding all face-to-face social interaction. Citations: Danielle, T. (n.d.). 9 Irrational Panics From History About “Crazy” Technology That We Use Everyday Now. Retrieved June 27, 2019, from https://www.ranker.com/list/historical-freak-outs-about-new-technology/taeyuraLaFrance, A. (2015, September 6). When the Telephone Was Dangerous. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2015/09/when-the-telephone-was-dangerous/403609/ Airplanes               Flying in the 1950’s was far more dangerous than it is today. All it took was a bit of turbulence and someone’s neck could snap. At the time, airplanes weren’t designed as much for safety either, so even tripping as one walks across the plane could result in death or injury. There were even glass dividers separating first class from economy that could shatter and cause injury in an accident or turbulence. The fatality rate on airplanes in 1952 was 5.2 deaths per every 100,000 hours of flight, whereas, the fatality rate on airplanes today is 1.33 fatalities per 100,000 hours of flight. Given these dangers and statistics, it makes sense why people of the 1950’s feared airplanes. Citations: Brownlee, J. (2013, December 5). What It Was Really Like To Fly During The Golden Age Of Travel. Retrieved from https://www.fastcompany.com/3022215/what-it-was-really-like-to-fly-during-the-golden-age-of-travel Personal Computers               Computers were feared for several reasons, ranging from the fear of computers enslaving people to the fear of the overwhelming complexity of using a computer. This fear of computers is known as cyberphobia and was prevalent at the time personal computers were first introduced to society.               In 1996, there was a book released claiming women were afflicted with cyberphobia called “Women and Computers”. The book entailed descriptions of emotions women faced that reflected a fear of touching, damaging, discussing, or reading about computers. It was also stated in the book that women feared becoming enslaved by the computers. This fear of enslavement by computers is explained by the distinction between two different views of computers and the reaction of women to such distinction.               When personal computers were first released, they were either thought of as a tool or machine. Those who considered computers as a tool saw computers as an extension of the user. Whereas, those who viewed computers as machines saw computers as an instrument that imposes its own rhythm and rules on the users. Females who viewed computers as a machine were more likely to fear them; many females at the time did not like the idea of being “slaves” by being forced to work according to the machine’s rules. Citations: Grundy, A. F., & Grundy, J. (1996). Women and Computers. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?id=XKD8oj4x26QC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q&f=falseNguyen, C. (2016, August 2). 7 world-changing inventions that were ridiculed when they came out. Retrieved from https://www.businessinsider.com/inventions-that-were-ridiculed-2016-8#personal-computers-5 Television               People’s fear of the television was like a magnified version of their previous fear of radio. There was a fear that television would harm the social interaction between people and degrade the American culture. People genuinely thought that there’d be no more reading or conversing with one another, and the television would alter family relationships.               Not only was the television feared for its possible impact on social interactions, it was also feared by investors for its possible impact on the radio. Radio investors feared the new technology would harm their investments as people turn from radio to television. This contributed to a great amount of criticism towards the television. Citations: Danielle, T. (n.d.). 9 Irrational Panics From History About “Crazy” Technology That We Use Everyday Now. Retrieved June 27, 2019, from https://www.ranker.com/list/historical-freak-outs-about-new-technology/taeyura Video Games               Starting in 1976 videogames became a topic of controversy. Up until 1976, video games released were either nonviolent or featured violence that was considered morally acceptable. The release of Exidy’s Death Race video game set off the controversy in 1976 by featuring a game in which points were awarded to the player by mowing down pedestrians, an immoral form of violence. People feared the spread of immoral values through video games, which is what set off the controversy.               In 1997, videogames were brought to court for the first time by anti-video games activist and attorney Jack Thomson. After the death of students in a shooting at Heath High School, Thomson came to court with the claim that the shooter’s violence was a result of violent video games. Thomson based his claim on the idea that the distribution of violent materials like violent video games cause desensitization and tendencies towards violence in minors. While Thomson’s case was dismissed for failing to present a legally recognizable claim, his thoughts towards the impact of violent video games on minors is still a topic in society today. Citations: National Coalition Against Censorship. (n.d.). A Timeline of Video Game Controversies. Retrieved June 27, 2019, from https://ncac.org/resource/a-timeline-of-video-game-controversiesKocurek, C. A. (n.d.). The Agony and the Exidy: A History of Video Game Violence and the Legacy of Death Race. Retrieved from http://gamestudies.org/1201/articles/carly_kocurek Cloning/Genetics               When most people think of cloning, they think of the sci-fi scary stories they’ve seen on television or read about. This has caused a lot of fear and suspicion towards the scientific community when it comes to cloning. People have feared things ranging from unethical baby farms for organs to the mass production of carbon-copy people. These sci-fi based fears of the masses towards cloning make it hard for people to see the benefits of cloning in the medical world, but certainly aren’t uncalled for.               With the new gene editing technologies on the rise and its possible integration with cloning, there is moral concern. Gene editing and cloning could be used together to create “designer babies”, which could result in discrimination towards people of certain characteristics and hybrid peoples, which is unnatural. There’s also the use of developing embryos in cloning, which raises a moral concern. Some have claimed the use of embryo’s for stem cell research is unethical because it is in essence killing one person to save another.               The fears raised by people towards cloning and genetics is rather unique because they’re more moral based than based on the actual effects on society. For instance, people fearing the use of embryos in cloning is solely based on the morality of it. As in, is the use of embryos actually killing one person to save another? Because if so, people are determining who does and doesn’t deserve to live. Which is a fear of moral not a fear of impact on society. Other inventions like the radio were feared for their direct impact on society. Like people feared radio would ruin the social interactions between people; a fear of impact not morals. Citations: Sandel, M. J. (2002, May 28). The Anti-Cloning Conundrum. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/28/opinion/the-anti-cloning-conundrum.htmlWired Staff. (2004, February 12). The Truth Behind Fear and Cloning. Retrieved from https://www.wired.com/2004/02/the-truth-behind-fear-and-cloning/ Conclusion               Technophobia continues in our modern-day society, and will likely never cease. Currently, society is going through a wave of fear over developing AI technology. This fear is partially based on the sci-fi movies featuring AI machines that outsmart and enslave the human race causing suspicion and distrust by people towards AI machine advancement. However, we’ll never know if this fear is a bunch of sci-fi fantasy or if it’s legitimate until the development and integration of AI technology is complete. [...]