Thursday, July 24, 2025

DH25004 Human Cell V01 240725


 What does life look like at its smallest, most fundamental level? Thanks to a revolutionary 3D reconstruction based on real molecular data, we now have one of the most detailed visualisations ever created of a single human cell, and it’s absolutely stunning. Built using cutting-edge techniques like X-ray crystallography, electron microscopy, and advanced computational modelling, this view offers a window into the microscopic universe within us.


Unlike illustrations or artistic guesses, every structure in this model is placed with scientific precision. Researchers used data from actual molecules to map the complex architecture of the cell, including the nucleus, mitochondria, ribosomes, cytoskeleton, and countless other components. Each element is meticulously rendered and layered with lifelike lighting and transparency, giving the viewer an X-ray-like vision that is both beautiful and biologically accurate.


The cell is not just a simple blob; it’s an entire world of microscopic machines. Proteins fold and interact with purpose, organelles coordinate energy and information, and countless molecular processes keep the system alive second by second. This model captures the complexity, chaos, and symmetry that drive the very foundation of all living things.


This groundbreaking visual is more than just science, it’s also art. It evokes awe and wonder, making the invisible visible and transforming dry textbook diagrams into emotionally powerful representations of life. It helps us understand not only how cells work but why they matter.


Whether you’re a scientist, student, or simply curious about what makes life tick, this model is a remarkable reminder of the intricate machinery hidden within every one of us. A single cell holds the instructions and tools for life and now, we can finally see it.


Follow for more History Facts!

#HistoricalFacts #HistoryFacts #USAHistory #TimeTravel #DidYouKnow #CellBiology #MicroscopicWorld #ScienceArt #XrayVision #HumanCell

Friday, July 18, 2025

DH25003 Molecular Biology V01 190725

 Personalised treatments fight cancer molecule by molecule

The Times copyright acknowledge. 

Genetically informed care is changing the way the disease is treated for each person, Poppy Koronka writes
Annie Baker says her trial treatment allowed her to be “a mum at home”

“Way back, ages ago, we thought that cancer is defined as cells that grow fast,” Dr Dani Edmunds, from Cancer Research UK, explained. Treatments were, and still are, based on this premise, targeting and destroying fastgrowing cells through chemotherapy and radiotherapy, killing any cancer.

“As we know more, we know that different cancers are … different,” he added. “Now we’re thinking, ‘What if we don’t look at the cancer based on its location but based on its genetic makeup?’ Because of the rise in DNA sequencing it’s so much easier to sequence or read the DNA of cells in our tumours.”

This new era of hyper-personalised, genetically informed cancer care is already changing for ever the way the disease is treated.

Professor Peter Johnson, the National Clinical Director for cancer at NHS England, said: “We’ve seen a transformation of our understanding of the biology and the drivers of cancer for ten to twenty years now.”

While the location of a cancer is still relevant, a far more detailed understanding of the disease is now required.

“We simply don’t talk about breast cancer any more,” Johnson said. “We talk about several different molecular types of breast cancer.

“That matters because what we’ve found in trials is that the way you need to treat them is different.”

This personalised approach is changing care from diagnosis and treatment, to preventing the return of cancers. In terms of treatment, some patients can now access immunotherapy, in which a person’s immune system is trained to destroy cancerous cells.

New techniques are also emerging for cancers with different genetic profiles, allowing doctors to hyper-personalise treatments to each individual case.

“It could be that we find a change, a fault in a gene that causes lots of breast cancers,” Edmunds said. “And then scientists go and develop a drug that targets and blocks that fault to treat breast cancer.”

In a study published today in the journal eBioMedicine, scientists have done just that — creating a test for breast cancer that predicts the likelihood of it returning within two weeks of the treatment being started.

Scientists from the Institute of Cancer Research, London, were able to detect the likelihood of a cancer recurrence in patients with oestrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer.

This meant that some patients could “de-escalate” their treatment sooner, while others could get more intensive interventions earlier.

Patients are already finding that this more personalised approach is increasing the chances of survival, giving them a better quality of life and a greater peace of mind.

Annie Baker, 45, was diagnosed with breast cancer during the pandemic in 2021.

After initial brutal treatment of chemotherapy and a mastectomy, she learnt that she had the BRCA2 gene, making the chances of her cancer returning far more likely.

Instead of living under the shadow of a returning cancer, Baker, who works in waste management, enrolled in a trial designed specially for people with this mutation.

In the trial by researchers at the London cancer institute, Baker was prescribed Olaparib tablets twice a day for a year. In doing so, she cut by more than a third her chances of the cancer returning.

By simply taking this drug she avoided the threat of another debilitating course of chemotherapy.

During her treatment, Baker was well enough to complete a 10km race and continued working — which she said was “amazing” for her peace of mind.

“I was a mum at home,” she added. “I was just able to live my normal life. I felt a bit queasy to begin with and I was definitely a bit more tired and things.

“But it was two tablets twice a day for a year and it’s been just an amazing change in prognosis really. I felt much more positive. I just had more hope and more reassurance.”

Innovations in testing within NHS England have improved patients’ care. 

The emergence of “liquid biopsy” testing to diagnose cancer through an analysis of DNA fragments in the blood has enabled the treatment to be personalised from the very beginning.

Johnson said the liquid biopsies allowed for an early diagnosis and a faster look at the genetic profile of any potential cancer.

“It’s interesting because it tells you not just that there might be a cancer present in the body but gives you a very strong indication as to whereabouts in the body it would be,” the professor added. “This is obviously important for the NHS because we need to know how to investigate people.

“We need to know whether to do a CT scan of their chest or a colonoscopy to look at the lining of their bowel, for example.”

Johnson said specialised care would not eradicate all the side effects of treatment but it would ensure that all the treatments were right for each patient.

“It will allow us to diagnose cancers at an earlier stage,” he added. “It will help us to work out what the most effective treatment is to maximise people’s chances of surviving cancer.

“It will help us to use the resources of the NHS as efficiently as possible to make sure that we’re getting the best possible results of treatment for the investment that we make and it will help people to have the treatment which is right for their type of cancer.

“[Cancer is] an ever-growing problem and we need to make sure that we are doing everything we can to maximise the chances of survival. The NHS isn’t just a passive recipient of this developing knowledge.

“We need to make sure we’re a really active partner in helping people to get the research done, helping to find patients who might be suitable for [upcoming] trials.”

Sunday, July 13, 2025

DH25002 Cryptomnesia V01 140725

My bad memory embarrasses me
Ask Professor Tanya Byron

Q I recently experienced something weird and a bit mortifying. At a dinner party, I told what I thought was a brilliant anecdote about a bizarre encounter on a train. Everyone laughed … until my friend pointed out that she was the one who’d told me that story, weeks earlier. I had no memory of her telling it. I genuinely thought it had happened to me.

This isn’t the first time. I’ve caught myself repeating jokes or “remembering” a dream that turns out to be from a book I read. I feel like a fraud! Or like I’m slowly losing my mind. I’m not intentionally copying anyone. In fact, I’m hypersensitive to plagiarism. But moments like this shake my confidence. Is this just poor memory, or is something deeper going on? I’m in my late thirties, in good mental health and otherwise sharp.

I’m not worried about dementia, but I do feel confused about what’s happening in my brain. It’s so embarrassing. Is this a me-problem or do our minds sometimes steal from others without our knowing? 
Sam 

A What you are describing is a fascinating glimpse into how human memory works — messy, fluid, fallible, and often unintentionally creative.

You’re experiencing a psychological phenomenon known as cryptomnesia — literally, hidden memory in Greek (“crypto” means hidden and “mnesia” means memory). It’s not lying or stealing, it’s more like your mind pulling something out of the archive with the label peeled off.

To reassure you, you are in good company. Mark Twain once received a letter accusing him of plagiarising part of a speech, only to realise, to his horror, that the exact passage had been written years earlier by a friend.

Helen Keller, in childhood, was accused of copying a story she thought she had invented, which devastated her and created a lifelong anxiety about authorship. And George Harrison’s song My Sweet Lord bore such a strong resemblance to He’s So Fine by the Chiffons that it resulted in a court case, where the judge concluded that the copying was “subconscious”. As Salvador Dalí once said: “Those who do not want to imitate anything, produce nothing”.

You feel ashamed not because you’re dishonest, but because it threatens a sense of self and leads you to question where your ideas end and others’ begin. But these are existential questions not memoryrelated ones, and to understand cryptomnesia we need to understand how memory works.

We are constantly absorbing stories, ideas, snippets of conversation, turns of phrase, and storing them away without knowing it. This is implicit memory — content we’ve encoded without conscious intention. When that content is later retrieved (for example, in the middle of a lively dinner conversation), it doesn’t always come with its proper attribution tag.

Also, if it fits our personality or emotional experience, it may feel like ours. And this is where things get messy, because when implicit memory resurfaces, it doesn’t always announce itself as borrowed.

We like to think that memory is a tidy storage system and a fixed record of the past, where information is clearly filed by source and date. But psychologically and neurologically memory is reconstructive. So every time we recall something, we don’t simply retrieve it like a saved document, we rebuild it using context, fragments, emotion, and guesswork. Memory, therefore, is also derivative.

This is what Twain went on to describe, well before we could understand memory in the way that we now can. He did acknowledge incorporating ideas and phrases from other writers into his own work without realising it, and described this as “unconscious plagiarism”. He correctly concluded that to some extent, all writing is derivative, and therefore that conscious plagiarism is rare.

Memory comprises three core processes: encoding, storage and retrieval. Think of memory like a library. Encoding is the moment a new book is written and added to the catalogue — it’s how new information enters the system. Storage is how that book is shelved and maintained over time; sometimes it’s filed neatly, but other times it’s misplaced, damaged, or slowly forgotten. Retrieval is what happens when you go looking for that book. Occasionally it’s easy to find, other times it takes effort, and sometimes you pull out the wrong one or never locate it.

There are also different types of memory. Episodic memory stores what we remember, such as our first kiss. Semantic memory holds what we know, for example that whales are mammals. Procedural memory deals with skills such as riding a bike. And then there’s working memory, which is the mental Post-it note we use to juggle things in the moment, like remembering a phone number long enough to dial it.

All of these forms of memory rely on different regions of the brain: the hippocampus is crucial for forming new memories, while the prefrontal cortex helps with retrieval and decision-making.

Because memories are not stored in one neat corner and are distributed across complex neural networks, they are vulnerable to all kinds of glitches. This can result in, for example, an accurate memory of content but no memory, or an inaccurate one, of authorship.

Also, because memory is reconstructive, it’s susceptible to errors. We misremember timelines, merge events, or recall things that never actually happened. Sometimes we remember the gist but change the details. This is called gist-based memory distortion, a phenomenon where we recall the overall meaning (gist) but misremember or alter specific details.

Other times, we remember the details but forget the source: cryptomnesia.

"It leads you to question where your ideas end and others’ begin

All this is more likely to happen when we are tired or cognitively overloaded, or if the memory was encoded casually (during a conversation rather than deliberate learning), and also when the story or idea felt relatable or resonated emotionally. This all suggests that cryptomnesia happens to thoughtful, emotionally attuned, verbally fluent people more than most.

If you start being anxious and selfconscious about the possibility of cryptomnesia, this can make it more likely to happen. When we are overly focused on not copying others, our brain becomes overloaded. This constant self-monitoring adds cognitive strain, which reduces working memory capacity, making it harder to accurately track where an idea came from in the first place.

Anxiety also disrupts what’s known as source monitoring, which is the brain’s ability to tag memories with their origin — whether you read something, heard it in conversation or thought it yourself. Worry and selfdoubt can blur these mental labels, meaning we may recall someone else’s words as our own without realising it.

Finally, when we’re anxious, we become hyper-attuned to content that feels personally relevant. The more emotionally connected we feel to something, the more likely we are to absorb and internalise it. Later, when it resurfaces, it feels like ours because it fits.

In this way, anxiety doesn’t just cloud memory, it shapes it. So the more you fear cryptomnesia, the more susceptible you may become to it, not because you’re careless, but because that fear interferes with how memory actually works. What this means is that cryptomnesia isn’t a character flaw, it’s a quirk of being human.

We are, cognitively speaking, communal creatures, so our stories will bleed into each other’s. What can you do? Well, you can’t eliminate cryptomnesia entirely, but you could build awareness and humility around your storytelling. You could, for example, preface anecdotes with: “I think this happened to me…” or “I may have heard this somewhere, but…”. Also, accept correction without shame — others are more likely to laugh and relate than judge.

Cryptomnesia can be seen as a metaphor for how we unconsciously remix memory and meaning, retelling borrowed stories not to deceive, but to make sense of something in ourselves that hasn’t yet found its own voice. So, don’t be embarrassed or feel guilty for being human. Next time it happens, smile, apologise. And tell your friend that they clearly have excellent material. I wish you well.

If you would like Professor Tanya Byron’s help, email proftanyabyron@ thetimes.co.uk

Tuesday, July 8, 2025

DH25001 Lung Cancer Vaccine V01 080725

 A world-first lung cancer vaccine is now in human trials — and it could change everything.

Doctors have begun trialing the world’s first mRNA lung cancer vaccine across seven countries. 

The vaccine, known as BNT116 and developed by BioNTech, targets non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)—the most common and deadliest form of the disease. Using the same mRNA technology that powered COVID-19 vaccines, the jab trains the immune system to identify and destroy cancer cells while minimizing harm to healthy tissue. 

Early participants in the trial include 67-year-old Janusz Racz from London, who began treatment at University College London Hospitals.

The phase 1 trial will involve about 130 patients globally, including 20 in the UK, and marks a key step toward potentially making this therapy standard care. 

Delivered in weekly doses followed by maintenance injections, the vaccine is combined with immunotherapy to enhance the body’s anti-cancer defenses. Researchers hope this groundbreaking approach will not only treat existing tumors but also prevent recurrence — a major hurdle in lung cancer survival. 

If successful, future trial phases could usher in a new era of personalized cancer treatment and dramatically improve outcomes for millions worldwide.


🔗 Read more from University College London Hospitals: https://www.uclh.nhs.uk/news/first-uk-patient-receives-innovative-lung-cancer-vaccine


#LungCancer #CancerVaccine #BioNTech #mRNAtechnology #CancerResearch #MedicalBreakthrough #NSCLC #HealthNews #Immunotherapy #PersonalizedMedicine #ScienceNews #FutureOfMedicine #UCLH #LungCancerAwareness #ClinicalTrials