Monthly Archives: January 2012

Never bleed again? New nanoscale bio coating stops bleeding in seconds

Leave a reply

It’s not quite instantaneous but the new nanoscale biological coating devised by MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) engineers at their Institute of Soldier Nanotechnologies cuts bleeding time to less than 1/2 of what it was (from 150 seconds to 60 seconds) in animal tests. The Jan. 10, 2012 news item on Nanowerk provides more detail,

MIT engineers have developed a nanoscale biological coating that can halt bleeding nearly instantaneously, an advance that could dramatically improve survival rates for soldiers injured in battle.

The researchers, led by Paula Hammond and funded by MIT’s Institute of Soldier Nanotechnologies and a Denmark-based company, Ferrosan Medical Devices A/S, created a spray coating that includes thrombin, a clotting agent found in blood. Sponges coated with this material can be stored stably and easily carried by soldiers or medical personnel.

The Jan. 10, 2012 news release by Anne Trafton for MIT notes,

Uncontrolled bleeding is the leading cause of trauma death on the battlefield. Traditional methods to halt bleeding, such as tourniquets, are not suitable for the neck and many other parts of the body. In recent years, researchers have tried alternative approaches, all of which have some disadvantages. Fibrin dressings and glues have a short shelf life and can cause an adverse immune response, and zeolite powders are difficult to apply under windy conditions and can cause severe burns. Another option is bandages made of chitosan, a derivative of the primary structural material of shellfish exoskeletons. Those bandages have had some success but can be difficult to mold to fit complex wounds.

Many civilian hospitals use a highly absorbent gelatin sponge produced by Ferrosan to stop bleeding. However, those sponges need to be soaked in liquid thrombin just before application to the wound, making them impractical for battlefield use. Hammond’s team came up with the idea to coat the sponges with a blood-clotting agent in advance, so they would be ready when needed, for either military or civilian use.

To do that, the researchers developed a nanoscale biological coating that consists of two alternating layers sprayed onto a material, such as the sponges used in this study. The researchers discovered that layers of thrombin, a natural clotting protein, and tannic acid, a small molecule found naturally in tea, yield a film containing large amounts of functional thrombin. Both materials are already approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which could help with the approval process for a commercialized version of the sponges, Shukla [Anita Shukla PhD ’11] says.

A key advantage of the spray method is that it allows a large amount of thrombin to be packed into the sponges, coating even the interior fibers, says David King, a trauma surgeon and instructor in surgery at Massachusetts General Hospital who was not involved in this research.

“All of the existing hemostatic materials suffer from the same limitation, which is being able to deliver a dense enough package of hemostatic material to the bleeding site. That’s why this new material is exciting,” says King, also an Army reservist who has served in Afghanistan as chief of trauma surgery.

Very exciting stuff but no word as to when it might reach the marketplace. A patent application has been filed but it doesn’t seem that any human clinical trials have been held yet. As best I can determine, all of the testing done (at Ferrosan) so far has been on animals.

I did check out the Ferrosan website and found this on their About page,

Ferrosan is an international consumer health company with strong market positions and a solid financial performance.

We strive for optimal development by selectively aiming for position as a leader through organic as well as M&A-driven growth.

In order to accomplish our objectives each employee must deliver upon Ferrosan’s values:

  • Get things done
  • Exceed expectations
  • Appreciate individual differences
  • Enjoy and have fun

The foundation of our future success is based on each employee’s ability to make a difference.

Ferrosan is a well established pharmaceutical company with a great heritage. In 2010, we celebrated the company’s 90th anniversary.

Ted Sargent and Inerjys

Leave a reply

Ted Sargent, Canada Research Chair in Nanotechnology, University of Toronto, has been mentioned here a number of times regarding his work on solar cells. Here are a few of the mostly recent postings (not a complete list), June 28, 2011, July 11, 2011, and Sept. 20, 2011.

Now, a Montréal-based company, Inerjys Ventures has just announced that Ted Sargent has joined their board of advisors. From the Jan. 9, 2012 news item on MarketWatch,

Inerjys Ventures, a $1 billion renewable energy strategic investment fund and global leader in green finance, announced today that it has constituted a board of advisors and named its first members. Inerjys has brought together thought leaders from renewable energy, finance and government to guide its decisions and strategic vision as the world approaches a clean energy economy.

The announcement comes at a decisive time for Inerjys, which was recently featured at the prestigious World Climate Summit in Durban, South Africa. The firm is currently developing several large-scale renewable energy projects worldwide, to be announced as it completes the closing of its renewable energy investment fund, Inerjys Ventures. At a projected capitalization of $1 billion CAD, Inerjys Ventures will be the largest cleantech venture vehicle in Canada and one of the largest in the world. The board will convene regularly to direct the growth of Inerjys and will lend their expertise to analyze investment opportunities in Canada and around the world.

You can learn more about Inerjys here.

Alberta Science Foundation, two Webbys, and nanotechnology

Leave a reply

Better late than never, as they say. The Science Alberta Foundation won a Webby in May 2011 for its animated video, Do you know what nano means? From a May 10, 2011 article by Jody McPhearson for the University of Calgary’s Today website,

The International Academy of Digital Arts and Sciences named Science Alberta Foundation’s “Do You Know What Nano Means?” the best online animated video of the year.

The video, available at www.wonderville.ca, was produced by Science Alberta with the help of a Calgary think tank including University of Calgary chemistry professor and director of the nanosciene program Dr. David Cramb and two of his students.

“I was frankly surprised even to be nominated, let alone to win,” writes a modest Cramb. “The competition was awesome. I think our advantage may have been multifold. First, the quirkiness of the animation was really catchy. It makes me think of Tim Burton [an Albertan artist drew the animation]. Second, the timing of subject matter (nano) could not have been more perfect. Lastly, the message was simple and clear. Even a child could get it, and that was the point.”

The Wonderville website, where the award-winning animation and others can be found, was highlighted here in my April 4, 2011 posting.

I belatedly learned of the award in a Jan. 8, 2012 article by Chris Nelson about the Alberta Science Foundation and its chief executive officer (CEO), Arlene Ponting, recently voted one of Canada’s 100 most influential women for the third time in a row, for the Calgary Herald,

In June, the foundation was honoured in New York with two Webby awards – international awards honouring excellence on the Internet.

“We created an animation on nanotechnology showing how small nano actually is. It was a very difficult concept because nano is so small people can’t imagine it.” [said Ponting]

Up against 10,000 applications from more than 60 countries, the foundation won in the film and animation categories. In accepting, they were allowed five words to describe their entry and their vision.

They chose: Small Is the New Big.

“Nanotechnology is a small science, but has a huge impact and the Science Alberta Foundation is a small organization, but we have a huge impact. Last year we provided over a million science experiences through our program so the parallel is serendipitous.” [said Ponting]

There’s more about Ponting in the article; I wanted to focus on the nano.

Nanotechnology-enabled paint coating to shave millions off British Airways fuel costs?

2 Replies

For most people from Vancouver (BC, Canada), Triple-O means a popular (they use the word legendary) sauce used on hamburgers at a local restaurant chain, The White Spot. There is another tripleO (one that will save much money for British Airways [BA]) according to the Jan. 9, 2012 news item on Nanowerk,

British Airways is to extend a trial of an innovative paint coating designed to improve fuel efficiency in a move that could save the airline millions of pounds in fuel costs.

The tripleO coating bonds with the surface materials – such as paintwork, bare metal, leading edges and even rivets – to which it is being applied. It creates a perfectly smooth finish, forming a barrier to prevent dirt building up on the aircraft and improving aerodynamics.

It was applied to a British Airways Airbus A318 aircraft which operates exclusively on the London City to New York route. During the year long trial period, the aircraft used less fuel than a second Airbus A318, which did not have the coating.

The coating will now be applied to a Boeing 777-200, with data being collected during a further trial period. It is hoped that applying the coating to larger aircraft will result in an even greater fuel efficiency improvement, with the airline hoping to save in excess of £100,000 during the 777 trial.

…

As well as improving fuel efficiency, tripleO also improves the aircraft appearance, and leads to prolonged paint life. Further environmental benefits come from less frequent cleaning and painting.

I assume that tripleO is projecting that millions of pounds will be saved based on the first test. Why do they not give any numbers, e.g. amount saved on fuel costs over the period of the test?

I was able to get some more information on the company website although I found it a bit confusing. According to the company’s History page, it was founded in 2002,

Paul Booker and his wife Tania established ooops.net limited on June 11th 2002 and having moved into their brand new premises on October 1st 2002 commenced trading on October 15th 2002 as specialists in the repair, painting, maintenance and ‘detailing’ of all types of transportation, exterior and interior.

In 2007, after scouring the world our highly experienced and expert team found an innovative nano-technology paint sealant that was being used by the US Military and Government and the dynamic team at ooops! named it tripleO protection system and sought to distribute and apply this unique, proven and high performance coating technology product to the automotive market.

Yet this is claimed on the company’s Product page,

tripleO is over 30 years old

Our unique tripleO solution is proven in some of the most challenging applications, for some of the world’s most demanding organisations and industries.

At the turn of the millennium, tripleO was enhanced with nano-technology and has been proven by the U.S. Military to be so much more than an aircraft polish, protective coating or yacht varnish.

Maybe they licenced the product? In any event, they do boast these features (from the Product page),

  • Reduce ‘drag’ in the air, on the road or through the water; helping you reduce fuel consumption.
  • Remove and eliminate ‘debris build up’ on external surfaces – including contaminants from ice and dirt to sea water – again helping you reduce energy consumption.
  • Optimise your carbon footprint to meet your statutory environmental obligations.
  • Protect external and internal surfaces; increasing working life and return on your investment, while reducing cost of ownership.
  • Better clean and present exteriors and interiors; enhancing your livery, brand reputation and service levels.

Interestingly, they claim the product has neither silicon nor teflon but they don’t offer any details about it other than claim that it is  a nanotechnology-enabled paint coating.

Quantum mechanics and the naked eye

Leave a reply

Dual Wave/Particle Nature of Light Credit: Meeblax from Flickr

It’s a stunning image and it accompanies a fascinating story about a team at the University of Cambridge. The researchers built a chip that converts electrons to a quantum state where they emit light that’s visible to the naked eye. Here’s more from a Jan. 9, 2012 news item on Nanowerk,

Quantum mechanics normally shows its influence only for tiny particles at ultralow temperatures, but the team mixed electrons with light to synthesise supersized quantum particles the thickness of a human hair, that behave like superconductors.

Building microscopic cavities which tightly trap light into the vicinity of electrons within the chip, they produced new particles called ‘polaritons’ which weigh very little, encouraging them to roam widely.

The Jan. 8, 2012 news release on the University of Cambridge website notes this,

Dr Gab Christmann working with Professor Jeremy Baumberg and Dr Natalia Berloff of the University of Cambridge, together with a team in Crete, produced the special new samples needed which allow the polaritons to flow around at will without getting stuck.

…

According to Christmann: “These polaritons overwhelmingly prefer to march in step with each other, entangling themselves quantum mechanically.”

…

By moving the laser beams apart, Dr Christmann and his colleagues directly controlled the sloshing of the quantum liquid, forming a pendulum beating a million times faster than a human heart.

In the end, these scientists are trying to produce a generation of ultrasensitive gyroscopes that would measure gravity, magnetic field, and create quantum circuits based on an electrical battery developed from this discovery about electrons and polaritons.

It never occurred to me that quantum mechanics could be made visible and it seems I’m not the only one (from the University of Cambridge news release),

But as Christmann says: “Just to see and prod quantum mechanics working in front of your eyes is amazing.”

 

Bite-size science, not good for us

Leave a reply

I thought it was going to be a news item about how twitter and blogs are ruining science discourse but I’m glad to say I was wrong. The Dec. 28, 2011 news item about an article in the journal, Perspectives on Psychological Science by psychologists Marco Bertamini of the University of Liverpool and Marcus Munafò of the University of Bristol on MedicalXpress focuses on the trend towards shorter science papers,

“We’re not against concision,” says Bertamini. “But there are real risks in this trend toward shorter papers. The main risk is the increased rates of false alarms that are likely to be associated with papers based on less data.”

The article dispatches several claimed advantages of shorter papers. Proponents say they’re easier to read. Perhaps, say the authors, but more articles mean more to keep up with, more reviewing and editing—not less work. Proponents laud the increased influence authors gain from more citations. Precisely, say the two—but two short papers do not equal twice the scientific value of a longer one. Indeed, they might add up to less.

The reason: The smaller the experimental sample the greater the statistical deviations—that is, the greater the inaccuracy of the findings. … Strict word limits, moreover, mean cutting the details about previous research. The new results sound not only surprising but also novel. Write the authors: “A bit of ignorance helps in discovering ‘new’ things.”

I am particularly struck by that bit about cutting details of previous research. This means that reporters/journalists are more likely to be ‘under’ informed and, by extension, the general public (after reading the journalist’s account) not to mention the readers for whom the original research was intended.

US Environmental Protection Agency needs to do more about possible nanomaterial risks

Leave a reply

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has its own watchdog, the EPA Office of Inspector General. According to a Jan. 5, 2012 news item on Nanowerk that watchdog has published a report suggesting the EPA should do more to manage nanomaterials risks,

EPA has the statutory authority to regulate nanomaterials but currently lacks the environmental and human health exposure and toxicological data to do so effectively. The Agency proposed a policy under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act [FIFRA] to identify new pesticides being registered with nanoscale materials. After minimal industry participation in a voluntary data collection program, the Agency has proposed mandatory reporting rules for nanomaterials under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, and is also developing proposed rules under the Toxic Substances Control Act [TSCA]. However, even if mandatory reporting rules are approved, the effectiveness of EPA’s management of nanomaterials remains in question for a number of reasons:

  • Program offices do not have a formal process to coordinate the dissemination and utilization of the potentially mandated information.
  • EPA is not communicating an overall message to external stakeholders regarding policy changes and the risks of nanomaterials.
  • EPA proposes to regulate nanomaterials as chemicals and its success in managing nanomaterials will be linked to the existing limitations of those applicable statutes.
  • EPA’s management of nanomaterials is limited by lack of risk information and reliance on industry-submitted data.

The full report is titled EPA Needs to Manage Nanomaterial Risks More Effectively, Report No. 12-P-0162.

 

A math musical in Vancouver (BC, Canada) and a math workshop for poets at Banff (Alberta, Canada)

2 Replies

Mathematicians in Canada must be the wildest group of scientists we’ve got or perhaps they’re just the most creative of the lot. How else can you explain a math musical, Math Out Loud, which premiered Dec. 14, 2011 in Vancouver, and a workshop titled, Mathematics: Muse, Maker, and Measure of the Arts, held at the Banff International Research Station (BIRS) from Dec. 4 – 9, 2011).

I found out about the math musical in a Jan. 5, 2012 community newspaper article by Martha Perkins (for the WestEnder),

When Mackenzie Gray talks about the way Paul McCartney used a recursive sequence to make the song “I Want You (She’s So Heavy)” seem to last forever, you realize that part of the Beatles’ phenomenal success might have sprung from McCartney’s genius as a mathematician.

When Roger Kemp draws on a napkin to illustrate that you just have to change the way you think about numbers to come up with a binary code for pi (as in 3.14 ad infinitum), you get a sense that math can actually be a lot of fun.

Here’s a little more information about the play from a Dec. 14, 2011 news release,

“Math Out Loud is a major theatrical production that uses comedy, dance and music to make math approachable. Our goal is to reintroduce math to students in a new, creative light and hopefully re-open a door some may have considered closed.” [said Mackenzie Gray]

…

Highly-visible and well-recognized Vancouver television and film actor Mackenzie Gray (Superman: Man of Steel; Smallville; The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus) directed and wrote the script and songs. Academy Award-winning producer Dale Hartleben (The Man Who Skied Down Everest; 1976) produced the play. Acclaimed choreographer and Royal Winnipeg Ballet alumnus Joel Sturrock created the Broadway style dance numbers. Composer Joe Docherty arranged and recorded the music. A team of eight actors brings the production to life.

Math Out Loud tells the story of high school students Damon and Kelly as they share an adventure through a mathematical time-travelling dream full of colourful characters and conflicts that highlight the relevance of mathematics in a student’s busy modern life. Characters such as Christopher Columbus, Greek mathematician Eratosthenes and Cleopatra demonstrate mathematical principals tied to modern pop culture references. …

“If someone had told me three months ago a play could spark my interest in studying math, I wouldn’t have believed them,” said Sayer Roberts, one of the actors on stage with Math Out Loud. “I nearly failed math when I was in school. If math and science had been approached in a fun, unusual and creative way when I was in school, I’m pretty sure I’d have a different outlook on those subjects today.” [emphasis mine]

Yes, I heartily agree with Roberts’ sentiment. It’s amazing how many people shut down when they hear the word ‘science’ and it is, as he notes, all about how it’s introduced and taught. Bravo to the mathematicians for trying to turn that around.

The other project I mentioned, Mathematics: Muse, Maker, and Measure of the Arts, was profiled in a Dec. 16, 2011 post by Nassif Ghoussoub of Piece of Mind,

“Thank you so much for this opportunity for a non-mathematician to be part of the BIRS community”, wrote Alice Major. It doesn’t happen often that an illiterate mathematician gets an email from a Poet Laureate. Major was writing about her experience at last week’s workshop at BIRS (The Banff International Research Station). Entitled, “Mathematics: Muse, Maker, and Measure of the Arts”, the workshop was a BIRS classic. Her email made me feel even worse about not being there, and not only because I missed the likes of Ingrid Daubechies, David Mumford, and Robert Moody, who were merely the math. reps. for that event. Artists, musicians, poets, physicists and engineers were also there and they are now writing about it.

Artistic beauty and mathematical complexity have a history of interaction for as long as civilization itself: The golden ratio and the pyramids, Alhambra’s tessellations and the Penrose tiling, of course Da Vinci, Dali, Esher, and various minimalist and abstract schools of art, which had their roots in mathematics. But the workshop was about a totally different matter. It was about modern science and the future of such interactions.

Take for example, Stylometry analysis of literary style, which was initiated by the English logician, Augustus de Morgan, in the mid 1800’s as a way to settle questions of authorship by, for example, finding patterns in the length of words used by various authors.

Nassif goes on to a discussion of origami, Penrose tiles quasicrytals, robotics and more, as they relate to mathematics.

Alice Major, the poet laureate mentioned in Nassif’s post, wrote about her experience at Banff in a Dec. 14, 2011 posting,

The invitation to Banff thrilled me, but it also tipped me through a trap door in my psyche.  I would be surrounded by people who negotiated the academic environment easily. The list of participants detailed their various affiliations, but I had to be categorized as ‘independent.’ That sounds a lot sturdier than I felt. University had been a very scary place for me four decades ago. All my fellow students seemed to know so much more than me, to be so much more sophisticated than a kid from Outer Scarberia. I never seemed to have the right answers in class, the right clothes. And at that time I was only coping with the English program – a language I could supposedly understand – not the dense math language of symbol and equation.

So here I was. Nor could I just sit at the back of the class and absorb. At some point I was going to have to stand up and wring myself out. I’d have to talk to them. By the time I actually did so, my brain was melting jelly.

I intended to talk about metaphor, how it is an underlying mode of thought, not just a decoration, and applies to all realms of creation. Fortunately, writers can read bits of what they’ve written, and at least those sentences are coherent. I got through the outline of what I meant to say. But, in the discussion afterwards, when David Mumford asked a question about how we might teach metaphor better, I could only look at him and think, “A Fields medalist is asking me a question. What the $%@# do I say now?”

I gave some feebly irrelevant response. It was only afterwards, when the neural jelly was starting to re-set, that I thought, “For heavens sake, Alice, that whole chapter of the book is about how we can teach and learn metaphorical thinking!”

The book Major was remembering was her recently published, Intersecting Sets: A Poet Looks at Science.

So there you have it, math, poetry, musicals, dance, Penrose tiles, Gaussian distribution curves, etc.

Controlling cyborg insects

Leave a reply

After writing about cyborg insects and their possible use in emergency situations in my Nov. 23, 2011 posting, I started wondering how the insects could be made to dig down into the earth to find people trapped underground, etc. As it turns out, scientists have already been working on that problem, from the Jan. 6, 2012 news item on physorg.com,

An insect’s internal chemicals can be converted to electricity, potentially providing power for sensors, recording devices or to control the bug, a group of researchers at Case Western Reserve University report.

The finding is yet another in a growing list from universities across the country that could bring the creation of insect cyborgs – touted as possible first responders to super spies – out of science fiction and into reality. In this case, the power supply, while small, doesn’t rely on movement, light or batteries, just normal feeding.

“It is virtually impossible to start from scratch and make something that works like an insect,” said Daniel Scherson, chemistry professor at Case Western Reserve and senior author of the paper.

“Using an insect is likely to prove far easier,” Scherson said. “For that, you need electrical energy to power sensors or to excite the neurons to make the insect do as you want, by generating enough power out of the insect itself.”

…

The key to converting the chemical energy is using enzymes in series at the anode.

The first enzyme breaks the sugar, trehalose, which a cockroach constantly produces from its food, into two simpler sugars, called monosaccharides. The second enzyme oxidizes the monosaccharides, releasing electrons.

The current flows as electrons are drawn to the cathode, where oxygen from air takes up the electrons and is reduced to water.

After testing the system using trehalose solutions, prototype electrodes were inserted in a blood sinus in the abdomen of a female cockroach, away from critical internal organs.

…

The researchers found the cockroaches suffered no long-term damage, which bodes well for long-term use.

More technical details are available in the news item although I notice there is no mention of ethics. I’m happy to see that there doesn’t seem to be any long-term damage to any of the beasties they’ve tested so far but should we really take control of them in this way?