Interview of David Axelrod on Cancer Research

           The disease of cancer has been becoming more common within the past years. With no absolute cure, “cancer” is a word that no one wants to hear come out of his or her doctor’s mouth. Scientists all over the world have been studying cancer cells to attempt at finding a cure. One scientist, David Axelrod, does that here at Rutgers University. Professor Axelrod studies the way that cancer cells interact with normal cells and tries to determine when they transform into cancer cells. He has worked with breast cancer cells in the past, but most recently he is focusing his work on colon cancer. The research that David Axelrod and other scientists perform, help us understand the mutations of normal cells into cancer cells and could possibly lead to better treatment methods.

            
         Many people enter into the field of cancer research because they want to find a cure, or because they know someone who had cancer. Surprisingly, David Axelrod did not enter the genetics/cancer field for either of those reasons. 
“There were a lot of opportunities available with microorganisms, and I found them to be interesting. It wasn’t that I thought I could help people”, David Axelrod said. The fact that he is performing this research simply because he finds it interesting and enjoyable is somewhat inspiring to the youth. Yes, it would be great to have a job that helps people, but the best career a person can hope for is one where they find their work both interesting and stimulating. A person like David Axelrod, performing research simply because he finds in interesting brings the world closer to understanding the way in which cancer cells operate.  If someone researches cancer just because they want to help people, that doesn’t mean they also find their work stimulating.  In order for results to appear, we need scientists who research because they have a passion for it.  We need researchers who find their everyday work to be both enjoyable and interesting with no alternative motive.  One such researcher is David Axelrod at Rutgers University.
 

"Your Brain on Childhood" novel

The novel Your Brain on Childhood: The Unexpected Side Effects of Classrooms, Ballparks, Family Rooms, and the Minivan was written by Gabrielle Principle. She is a professor at Urisnus College and the story explores the downside of a so-called normal childhood in today’s society. It confronts the way that parents in today’s society raise their children. Parents seem to try and teach their children with television programs, in the hopes that their child will become more mature and possibly more intelligent at a faster rate. In their later stages, parents push them into doing things such as, piano lessons or baseball practices simply because they believe that the brain will develop faster. Today’s society views the development of the brain as a race, when it is not. The brain must develop in its own way in its own time. It does not need all of the excess things to try and accelerate the development. This novel seems interesting because the author, Gabrielle Principle, tries to demonstrate how the childhood process could be naturalized, allowing brain development to occur at its own pace. I think that this would be an interesting story to read because it could open your eyes to something you don’t necessarily notice normally. We see the progression of society and technology as good advancements, but this novel could suggest that those advancements could be having a negative affect on the development of the brain in children. Maybe the author’s message is that children should not be forced to develop faster than their body wants to. We should just let the process of brain development occur as naturally as possible. 

Interview Subject: David Axelrod

      David Axelrod is a scientist and professor for the department of genetics at Rutgers University. David Axelrod focuses most of his studies on oncology, the study of cancer, and the instability of these cancer cells. Several methods are used during his research including molecular biology, cell biology, and even computer simulation. Lately, Dr. Axelrod’s main focus is on breast cancer and breast cancer cells. He studies the heterogeneity and progress of the breast cancer cells to determine how they mutate. His research helps bring a better understanding to the progression of breast cancer cells. He has published many works and one particular published work introduces the idea of the game theory and its role in understanding cancer cells. Since every cancer cell within a certain tumor is different, they all act as “players” of the game theory. Each cancer cell has different mutations and needs but within the tumor, they cooperate together. The research of David Axelrod could benefit not only people already affected with cancer, but also those not diagnosed. His research could open up many more doors to the understanding of cancer cells and could possibly lead to better ways of treatment for cancer patients. 

Ancient Elephant Tracks Discovered

Scientists have discovered ancient elephant tracks in the desert of the United Arab Emirates.  They consist of at least 14 different individual's prints, with each print measuring about 40 centimeters wide. These tracks were made roughly six to eight million years ago and still remain preserved in the desert's sand. They are the longest continuous fossil tracks ever found and recorded to this date. Scientists believe that these tracks most likely belong to the extinct species Stegotetrabelodon syrticus. This species was a four-tusked animal similar to today’s elephants. The tracks are said to suggest that the ancient elephants were solitary mammals, similar to today’s elephants. With continuing research, more information could be revealed that relates to the way these ancient elephants lived and how they relate to today's elephants. 

This story appealed to me because I found it interesting that they had discovered the longest continuous fossil tracks in history. Also, these findings could give clues to the evolution of elephants and can help us understand their ancestors. The discovery of these tracks could just be the beginning, allowing researchers to uncover information that demonstrate how elephants evolved from their ancestors. 

Gene Therapy Ethics

             In most gene therapy studies and trials, a so-called normal gene is inserted into the genome of a person to replace the abnormal gene that causes the disease.  In order for this normal gene to be inserted into the genome, a vector must be used or the gene will not reach the target cells.  The vectors used are most commonly viruses such as: retroviruses, adenoviruses, adeno-associated viruses, and herpes simplex viruses (Human Genome, 2011).  Although this procedure seems to be very effective in reaching the target cell and correcting the abnormal one, several things could possibly occur that should not because a virus is used as the vector. 
            Two scientists, Ulrich Dettweiler and Perikles Simon published an article on the bioethics of gene therapy and they strongly believe that the use of viruses for vectors can be pathogenic (2001, p.492).  Research using viruses as a vector on monkeys showed positive effects, but in a somatic gene therapy trial, the results were not all positive. In fact, one participant ended up dead.  The death was a result of the virus used; it had been pathogenic to the human body. 

This was not the only recorded death due to gene therapy.  In the year 1999, an 18-year old man with a disorder of nitrogen metabolism began receiving gene therapy by a researcher at the University of Pennsylvania (Savulescu, 2001 p.148).  While taking part of the research, Jesse Gelsinger died due to an immune reaction to the virus vector.  His death became widely publicized and people began to question the ethics of gene therapy.  When is it all right to initiate human testing and if it’s time, how will the risks be assessed?  Certain regulations have been set up by organizations, including the FDA, to help evaluate the risks and make sure that the researchers inform the participants of all of the possible outcomes.

These deaths raise questions of whether gene therapy in considered ethical. I personally think that it is not very ethical, but it could prove to be useful in the future.