Translate

Showing posts with label scientific study. Show all posts
Showing posts with label scientific study. Show all posts

Saturday, 8 November 2014

Google Wants to Store Your Genome




Further to thumbprints......

*thud*

Google glasses that can record your every move, and now they wanna track your genomes? ..... I would read the fine print very carefully.  I suspect you'll find some interesting things in their "Terms and Conditions".....


... Just sayin'


http://www.technologyreview.com/news/532266/google-wants-to-store-your-genome/

Google Wants to Store Your Genome

For $25 a year, Google will keep a copy of any genome in the cloud.

Google is approaching hospitals and universities with a new pitch. Have genomes? Store them with us.
The search giant’s first product for the DNA age is Google Genomics, a cloud computing service that it launched last March but went mostly unnoticed amid a barrage of high profile R&D announcements from Google, like one late last month about a far-fetched plan to battle cancer with nanoparticles (see “Can Google Use Nanoparticles to Search for Cancer?”).
Google Genomics could prove more significant than any of these moonshots. Connecting and comparing genomes by the thousands, and soon by the millions, is what’s going to propel medical discoveries for the next decade. The question of who will store the data is already a point of growing competition between Amazon, Google, IBM, and Microsoft.
Google began work on Google Genomics 18 months ago, meeting with scientists and building an interface, or API, that lets them move DNA data into its server farms and do experiments there using the same database technology that indexes the Web and tracks billions of Internet users.
“We saw biologists moving from studying one genome at a time to studying millions,” says David Glazer, the software engineer who led the effort and was previously head of platform engineering for Google+, the social network. “The opportunity is how to apply breakthroughs in data technology to help with this transition.”
Some scientists scoff that genome data remains too complex for Google to help with. But others see a big shift coming. When Atul Butte, a bioinformatics expert at Stanford heard Google present its plans this year, he remarked that he now understood “how travel agents felt when they saw Expedia.”
The explosion of data is happening as labs adopt new, even faster equipment for decoding DNA. For instance, the Broad Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts, said that during the month of October it decoded the equivalent of one human genome every 32 minutes. That translated to about 200 terabytes of raw data.
This flow of data is smaller than what is routinely handled by large Internet companies (over two months, Broad will produce the equivalent of what gets uploaded to YouTube in one day) but it exceeds anything biologists have dealt with. That’s now prompting a wide effort to store and access data at central locations, often commercial ones. The National Cancer Institute said last month that it would pay $19 million to move copies of the 2.6 petabyte Cancer Genome Atlas into the cloud. Copies of the data, from several thousand cancer patients, will reside both at Google Genomics and in Amazon’s data centers.
The idea is to create “cancer genome clouds” where scientists can share information and quickly run virtual experiments as easily as a Web search, says Sheila Reynolds, a research scientist at the Institute for Systems Biology in Seattle. “Not everyone has the ability to download a petabyte of data, or has the computing power to work on it,” she says.
Also speeding the move of DNA data to the cloud has been a yearlong price war between Google and Amazon. Google says it now charges about $25 a year to store a genome, and more to do computations on it. Scientific raw data representing a single person’s genome is about 100 gigabytes in size, although a polished version of a person’s genetic code is far smaller, less than a gigabyte. That would cost only $0.25 cents a year.
Cloud storage is giving a boost to startups like Tute Genomics, DNANexus, Seven Bridges, and NextCode Health. These companies build “browsers” that hospitals and scientists can use to explore genetic data. “Google or Amazon is a back end. They are saying, ‘Hey, you can build a genomics company in our cloud,’” says Deniz Kural, CEO of Seven Bridges, which stores genome data on behalf of 1,600 researchers in Amazon’s cloud.
The bigger point, he says, is that medicine will soon rely on a kind of global Internet-of-DNA which doctors will be able to search. “Our bird’s eye view is that if I were to get lung cancer in the future, doctors are going to sequence my genome and my tumor’s genome, and then query them against a database of 50 million other genomes,” he says. “The result will be ‘Hey, here’s the drug that will work best for you.’ ”
At Google, Glazer says he began working on Google Genomics as it became clear that biology was going to move from “artisanal to factory-scale data production.” He started by teaching himself genetics, taking an online class, Introduction to Biology, taught by Broad’s chief, Eric Lander. He also got his genome sequenced and put it on Google’s cloud.
Glazer wouldn’t say how large Google Genomics is or how many customers it has now, but at least 3,500 genomes from public projects are already stored on Google’s servers. He also says there’s no link, as of yet, between Google’s cloud and its more speculative efforts in health care, like the company Google started this year, called Calico, to investigate how to extend human lifespans. “What connects them is just a growing realization that technology can advance the state of the art in life sciences,” says Glazer.
Somalee Datta, a physicist who manages Stanford University’s largest computer cluster for genetics data, says that because of recent price cuts, it now costs about the same to store genomes with Google or Amazon as in her own data center. “Prices are finally becoming reasonable, and we think they will keep dropping,” she says.
Datta says some Stanford scientists have started using a Google database system, BigQuery, that Glazer’s team made compatible with genome data. It was developed to analyze large databases of spam, web documents, or of consumer purchases. But it can also quickly perform the very large experiments comparing thousands, or tens of thousands, of people’s genomes that researchers want to try. “Sometimes they want to do crazy things, and you need scale to do that,” says Datta. “It can handle the scale genetics can bring, so it’s the right technology for a new problem.”

Saturday, 11 October 2014

'Life after death'? Scientists gather 'out-of-body' evidence in 'largest-ever' study



http://rt.com/news/195056-life-after-death-study/

'Life after death'? Scientists gather 'out-of-body' evidence in 'largest-ever' study

Published time: October 11, 2014 08:28
Edited time: October 11, 2014 13:16
Reuters / Finbarr O'Reilly
Reuters / Finbarr O'Reilly
It seems that scientists have finally offered evidence that consciousness after death really could exist, as the largest-ever study into the issue showed that patients could recall intricate details despite being officially declared clinically dead.
Researchers based at the UK’s University of Southampton, who were involved in the AWARE (“AWAreness during REsuscitation”) study, published in the journal Resuscitation, claim that almost 40 percent of people who survived clinical death described some kind of “awareness” during the time before their hearts were restarted.
The study, led by Dr. Sam Parnia, from the State University of New York at Stony Brook, spanned four years and involved 15 hospitals in the US, UK and Austria and more than 2,060 cases of cardiac arrest.
While a high proportion of patients were eliminated from the study on account of death, fatigue or leaving a stage two interview incomplete, two very specific cases stand out in the study - enough to throw doubt on the fact that all consciousness completely ceases upon declaration of death.
"I was up there, looking down at me, the nurse, and another man who had a bald head…I couldn’t see his face but I could see the back of his body. He was quite a chunky fella… He had blue scrubs on, and he had a blue hat, but I could tell he didn’t have any hair, because of where the hat was," one cardiac arrest patient recalled.
A post script in the study notes that : "Medical record review confirmed the...the medical team present during the cardiac arrest and the role the identified “man” played in responding to the cardiac arrest."
The second, albeit unverified, recollection states that: "At the beginning, I think, I heard the nurse say ‘dial 444 cardiac arrest."
However, Parnia maintained that the case was "significant".

AFP Photo / Spencer Platt
AFP Photo / Spencer Platt
The same patient reported bleeps from a machine that produced them at three minute intervals.
"In this case, consciousness and awareness appeared to occur during a three-minute period when there was no heartbeat," Parnia said. "This is paradoxical, since the brain typically ceases functioning within 20-30 seconds of the heart stopping and doesn’t resume again until the heart has been restarted. Furthermore, the detailed recollections of visual awareness in this case were consistent with verified events."
Parnia's team tracked down 330 patients who survived heart attacks; 140 of whom were willing to talk about their experiences. Of those who were interviewed, 61 percent said they didn’t remember anything, but the rest did.
The probe into the life-after-death realm showed that 46 percent experienced a broad range of mental recollections and 2 percent showed full awareness of their out-of-body experiences. From those interviewed, 13 percent claim they felt separated from their bodies.
A few recurring themes in memories were established, most common ones being fear, violence, and “a feeling of being persecuted.” Patients also experienced after-life images of family, animals and a bright light.
Researchers believe that the newest study shows a need to explore the subject area further.
“Estimates have suggested that millions of people have had vivid experiences in relation to death but the scientific evidence has been ambiguous at best,” Parnia said. “These experiences warrant further investigation.”