MachineMachine /stream - tagged with drugs https://machinemachine.net/stream/feed en-us http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss LifePress therourke@gmail.com <![CDATA[The Mastery of Non-Mastery]]> http://lareviewofbooks.org/post/20167996473/the-mastery-of-non-mastery

There are two types of anthropologists: One models himself on the scientist, treating the world as his laboratory, people as his raw data. He mounts surveys, crunches numbers, and, crucially, remains detached and dispassionate throughout the process. He applies for big research grants with “expected outcomes” and “anticipated impact” carefully delineated long before he has gone out into the field. The other kind of anthropologist is more like a religious initiate, participating fully in the culture in which he is placed and intimating that he is then the possessor of some secret knowledge. Like an initiate, he cannot anticipate any “outcomes” before they happen but must simply live in the moment and immerse himself in the local customs and values.

It is this latter tradition of which Michael Taussig, an eminent professor at Columbia University, is one of the greatest exponents. The New York Times has called his work “gonzo anthropology.” He has drunk hallucinatory yagé on the sandy banks of the Putumayo River. He’s cured the sick with the aid of spirits. He’s escaped from guerrillas in a dugout canoe at dawn. Above all, he is interested in individual stories and experiences, unique tales that cannot be reduced to rational explanation or bland report. To read Taussig is to have an adventure in which one can move from Walter Benjamin’s experiments with hashish to American kids’ drawings to that dawn-lit canoe without skipping a beat. His narrative is lyrical, mesmeric.

]]>
Sun, 08 Apr 2012 01:06:16 -0700 http://lareviewofbooks.org/post/20167996473/the-mastery-of-non-mastery
<![CDATA[Yung Jake - Datamosh]]> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nS7QvOX8LVk&feature=youtube_gdata ]]> Thu, 19 May 2011 01:51:45 -0700 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nS7QvOX8LVk&feature=youtube_gdata <![CDATA[Malaria caught on camera breaking and entering cell]]> http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/nstv/2011/01/malaria-caught-breaking-and-entering-red-blood-cell.html

The video above captures the moment when a malaria parasite invades a human red blood cell - the first time the event has been caught in high resolution.

The Plasmodium parasite responsible for malaria is transmitted by the bite of infected mosquitoes, and is thought to kill almost 1 million people worldwide each year.

Jake Baum at the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research in Melbourne, Australia, and colleagues used transmission electron microscopy, immuno-fluorescence and 3D super-resolution microscopy to record thousands of high-definition images of separate invasion events, a process that takes less than 30 seconds.

To boost their chances of catching Plasmodium parasites in the act of attacking a red blood cell the team controlled the process using two drugs. 

]]>
Mon, 24 Jan 2011 02:54:00 -0800 http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/nstv/2011/01/malaria-caught-breaking-and-entering-red-blood-cell.html
<![CDATA[Spiders On Drugs]]> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHzdsFiBbFc&feature=youtube_gdata ]]> Mon, 23 Nov 2009 07:47:00 -0800 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHzdsFiBbFc&feature=youtube_gdata <![CDATA[Overhyped Placebos of Doom?]]> http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/overhyped_placebos_of_doom/

Let’s say a new drug appears to be effective in combating a condition like chronic anxiety and is the subject of popular news stories. When the drug enters clinical trials, patients who take the drug report significantly less anxiety. But so do patients who were given sugar pills. Because FDA regulations require that any proposed drug perform significantly better than a placebo, the drug isn’t approved, and the pharmaceutical company developing the drug must swallow millions in research expenses. The regulations make some sense: Why approve a new drug with potential side effects when a placebo works just as well?

This is the primary misconception about placebos: that the placebo itself is somehow “working” to treat a medical condition. You can see it even in the headline for an otherwise well-crafted article that appeared in Wired last August: “Placebos Are Getting More Effective. Drugmakers Are Desperate to Know Why.” As internist and medical professor Peter Lipson noted on the Scien

]]>
Fri, 20 Nov 2009 03:35:00 -0800 http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/overhyped_placebos_of_doom/