Search Results

< Back to Issue 8 Microbic Mirror of The Self by Sarah Ibrahimi 3 June 2025 Edited by Jax Soon-Legaspi Illustrated by Noah Chen For decades, we did not fully understand the functional purposes of many parts of the human body. The spleen was once thought of as dispensable, earwax merely as dirty waste and the appendix as a useless leftover from the course of human evolution. But science has a habit of humbling us and we now know that all of these components serve essential purposes in the human body. Our understanding of the gut microbiome is following a similar pattern. However, beyond knowing that it plays a role, we still lack a full understanding of the true nature and mechanisms of this mysterious system. Given the average person's current understanding of microbes, it is unsurprising that they are often associated with disease, capable of causing some of the most deadly disorders. They are thought of as a foreign figure entirely and that should remain separate from us. Nevertheless, just like their occupation all over our skin, our gut is home to them too. When we think of our own identities, we tend to boil ourselves down to a singular body, a singular self. Typically, we define ourselves by our jobs, the activities we enjoy and the values we admire - elements all tied to a single individual. Yet, within us lives an entire biosphere that hosts a whole community of microbes. These minute beings govern our guts in symbiosis with other systems of the human body and outnumber human cells ten to one (1). It is a wonder how we are home to trillions of bacteria and are barely conscious of their existence. How do these seemingly fatal organisms operate cooperatively with the body? Can we construe the self as a singular individual when our body is a complex community with seemingly precarious organisms living within us? “What lies behind us and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us” - Ralph Waldo Emerson The community that is composed of bacteria, fungi, viruses and archaea plays a significant role in many aspects of our lives, affecting the way we digest food down to the regulation of our mental health. We understand the digestive system to be composed of the mouth, stomach, intestines and other vital organs as the main drivers of digestion. Similarly, the immune system depends on the bone marrow, spleen, white blood cells and antibodies to suppress an infection. Yet, the microbes sequestered within our gut assist extensively in driving the actions associated with these systems. In digestion, the range of their skill extends from the ability to synthesise vitamin K to using cross-feeding mechanisms - a phenomena where one bacterium breaks down parts of plant compounds and passes the byproducts to others, resulting in boosted health (2,3). They have also been shown to promote gut barrier integrity to prevent the entry of harmful pathogens, while also aiding in regulating immune system homeostasis, assisting the body in blocking harmful pathogens and enabling a strengthened immune response in the face of infection (3). Although there has been extensive research conducted to investigate the role of gut microbes in our physical health, their effects on our mental health have often been overlooked. Yet, they play a fundamental role in its regulation and the promotion of positive wellbeing. This contribution is most evident in the context of the gut-brain axis, which consists of two-way signalling between the central nervous system and enteric nervous system, serving the emotional and cognitive domains of the brain. Working hand-in-hand, the mental state of an individual can cause harmful alterations to the composition of healthy gut microbes and in a reciprocal manner, a dysregulated gut flora can adversely affect the brain through pathways such as immune activation and the production of neuroactive substances (4). Such imbalances in the gut microbiota have been linked to the emergence of depressive-like behaviours (5), though there is an increased prevalence of other psychiatric disorders like bipolar disorder, schizophrenia and anxiety that occur as a result too (6). The last decade of science has demonstrated a dramatic increase in the understanding of the gut microbiome as we know it today. Like in any field however, there is still more to be discovered. Similar to the infamous genome-wide association studies that assist in the recognition of certain genetic markers to particular diseases or traits through a statistical basis, metagenome-wide association studies are being conducted to identify associations with microbiome structures and several major diseases (7). Research in this field has already allowed for the detection of shifts in gut compositions and how these changes functionally contribute to many metabolic diseases. However, small sample sizes for such research highlight the requirement for greater development within the field. “The self is not something ready-made, but something in continuous formation through choice of action” - John Dewey The human body has a mutual relationship with the gut microbiome, like that of the gut-brain axis. So when one of these systems is not functioning at its peak, the performance of the other is also derailed. Dysbiosis of the gut's natural flora contributes to clinical conditions such as Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS), Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and anxiety (4). However, microbial imbalance is mediated through the actions and behaviours of the individual at hand. Both chronic and acute stressors can increase gut barrier permeability, resulting in a “leaky” gut, allowing bacteria to seep into the cracks and trigger an array of physiological responses like inflammation. It is safe to say that there is no single, definitive state that our individual guts exist in. In a world driven by antimicrobial usage, fluctuating diets and the invisible weight of daily stress, the gut microbiome remains in a state of constant transformation. Ever-changing, they mirror the conscious and unconscious choices we make, ultimately shaping our health in ways we are only beginning to imagine. References National Institutes of Health (NIH) [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2025 Jun 1]. NIH Human Microbiome Project defines normal bacterial makeup of the body. Available from: https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-human-microbiome-project-defines-normal-bacterial-makeup-body Mueller C, Macpherson AJ. Layers of mutualism with commensal bacteria protect us from intestinal inflammation. 2006 Feb 1 [cited 2025 Jun 1]; Available from: https://gut.bmj.com/content/55/2/276 Zhang YJ, Li S, Gan RY, Zhou T, Xu DP, Li HB. Impacts of Gut Bacteria on Human Health and Diseases. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2015 Apr;16(4):7493–519. Carabotti M, Scirocco A, Maselli MA, Severi C. The gut-brain axis: interactions between enteric microbiota, central and enteric nervous systems. Ann Gastroenterol. 2015;28(2):203–9. Bested AC, Logan AC, Selhub EM. Intestinal microbiota, probiotics and mental health: from Metchnikoff to modern advances: Part I – autointoxication revisited. Gut Pathogens. 2013 Mar 18;5(1):5. Nikolova VL, Smith MRB, Hall LJ, Cleare AJ, Stone JM, Young AH. Perturbations in Gut Microbiota Composition in Psychiatric Disorders: A Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry. 2021 Dec 1;78(12):1343–54. Wang J, Jia H. Metagenome-wide association studies: fine-mining the microbiome. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2016 Aug;14(8):508–22. Previous article Next article Enigma back to

Each issue of OmniSci Magazine is created by a team of passionate students, who contribute as writers, editors, designers, and behind the sciences as our organising committee. This interview series highlights six from our exceptional team for Issue 4: Mirage. Interview Series Each issue of OmniSci Magazine is c reated by a team of passionate students, who contribute as writers, editors, designers, and behind the sciences as our organising committee. This interview series highlights six from our exceptional team for Issue 4: Mirage, released in July 2023! Interviews by Caitlin Kane, Graphics by Aisyah Mohammad Sulhanuddin Meet OmniSci Editor Ta ny a Kovacevic Ever wondered what it's like to contribute to OmniSci? We spoke to Tanya Kovacevic about her experience, from starting writing during lockdown to what's in the words for Issue 4: Mirage! Tanya is currently in her third year of the Bachelor of Biomedicine and studying a concurrent diploma in Italian. For Issue 4: Mirage, she is contributing to four articles as an editor. READ MORE Meet OmniSci Writer Mahsa Nabizada Doubting time is real? We spoke to first-year uni student Mahsa Nabizada about her upcoming article on this very topic, plus advice for starting university and why Thorium has a special place in her heart. Mahsa is a writer at OmniSci and a first-year university student planning to study mathematical physics. For Issue 4: Mirage, she is writing about the illusion of time. READ MORE Meet OmniSci Writer and Editor Elijah McEv oy Bored of that one topic you need to keep revising this week? Read our chat with Elijah McEvoy about getting inspired by all areas of science, his sci-fi movie recommendations, and hear about his upcoming article about artificial intelligence. Elijah is a writer and editor at OmniSci and a second-year Bachelor of Science student. For Issue 4: Mirage, he is writing about artificial intelligence that masquerades as human, and contributing to two articles as an editor. READ MORE Meet OmniSci Designer and Committee Member Aisya h Mohammad Sulhanuddin Thinking of joining the OmniSci committee? We spoke to Aisyah, who incorporates her love for design into illustrations, events and social media at OmniSci, and shares her advice for those interested in getting involved (just do it!). Aisyah is a designer and Events Officer at OmniSci in her final year of a Bachelor of Science in geography. For Issue 4: Mirage, she is contributing to social media and as an illustrator. READ MORE Meet Omni Sci Writer and Committee Member Rachel Ko Curious what an OmniSci Editor-in-Chief actually does? We spoke to Rachel about drawing anatomy, interviewing a med student hero, and helping build the the science communication universe! Rachel is a writer and Editor-in-Chief at OmniSci, now in her first year of the Doctor of Medicine. For Issue 4: Mirage, she is writing an interview with science communicator, Dr Karen Freilich. READ MORE Meet OmniSci Designer Jolin See New to science? New to Melbourne? New to OmniSci? Yes, yes and yes! We spoke to Jolin about joining OmniSci with an art background, growing through challenges, and her best local exhibit recommendations. Jolin is a designer at OmniSci and an exchange student from Singapore studying Psychology and Arts & Culture Management. For Issue 4: Mirage, she is contributing to our website, and to two articles as an illustrator. READ MORE

< Back to Issue 2 The Evolution of Science Communication In the current age of social media, users hold far more autonomy over the posts and information which they share online. However, this was not always the case, with the media once being far more regulated, and restricted for only certain individuals. With users now having far more power over content posted online, how does this impact the information which others receive about the COVID-19 pandemic? by Monica Blasioli 10 December 2021 Edited by Khoa-Anh Tran & Yen Sim Illustrated by Rachel Ko Trigger warning: This article mentions illness, and death or dying. Since the beginning of the pandemic in March 2020, science communication has started to evolve in ways never before seen across the globe. There appears to be an endless amount of infographics, Facebook posts, and YouTube and TikTok videos… including some with dancing doctors. Information not only about the COVID-19 virus, but countless diseases and scientific concepts, is available in more casual, accessible language at only the touch of a button. Any questions which you might have about science or your body can be answered through a quick Google search. In this sense, science communication is now far more rapid, as well as more accessible than in research papers (which always seem like they are written in a foreign language at times). However, the downside of having vast amounts of information available is that it can create challenges in determining the validity of what is being presented. In previous years, science communication was typically limited to the more typical forms of media, such as in a newspaper or a magazine, or even through a television interview. These were typically completed by professionals in the field, such as a research scientist or a medical doctor. When looking at the 1920 Influenza outbreak, many citizens at that time would have received their information from printed newspapers and posters on bulletin boards, as seen below. Image 1, [1] Somewhat similar to today's age, there were signs displaying the importance of mask-wearing, and newspapers explaining the closures of schools and shops, the distribution of vaccines, and reports of death rates. These messages were, and still are, created and approved by larger institutions, governments and medical professionals, particularly doctors. As seen on the (left / right / below / above), doctors are urging people to not become complacent, despite a recent drop in influenza cases. This is rather similar to current newspaper or television news reports - only in reference to COVID-19, instead of influenza. Image 2, [2] There were, of course, still groups which were uncertain about the scientific evidence being provided by journalists, doctors and government officials at this time. In November of 1918, it was declared that “the epidemic of [influenza] disease is practically over,” with mask laws being relaxed. However, only a few days later, the previous mask laws were reintroduced with a spike in Influenza cases. As unpacked in Dr Dolan’s research [3], the “Anti-Mask League” formed and protested in response to this back track, claiming that masks were unsanitary, unnecessary, and stifling their freedom. As this was during the early 20th century, the league advertised their protests in local newspapers, with reports that hundreds of San Francisco residents were fined for not abiding by mask rules, often due to their alliance with the Anti-Mask League. The San Francisco Anti-Mask League is one of the most renowned and infamous groups of its time, with smaller-scale groups also questioning the science being communicated. This type of conflicting information surrounding mask issues, and the opinion that they restrict personal freedoms, have incited similar responses throughout history. However, resistance by anti-mask groups has not existed on such an influential and global scale, as it has during the current COVID-19 pandemic. With the rise of the age of “new media,” including platforms such as Instagram and Facebook, individuals now have far more autonomy over their role in the media, meaning that they yield a lot more power over the information others are receiving. Almost anybody can interpret scientific material online and upload it in a video of them dancing to some music on TikTok, spreading information to potentially hundreds of thousands of viewers across the globe. In many ways this new found autonomy and power can be quite beneficial. Australian Doctor Imogen Hines uses her platform on TikTok, alongside her medical education and current scientific research, to break down medical treatments and mistruths, particularly surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic. These videos use simple language and straight-forward analogies, “humanising” the often intimidating figures in the medical field, and allowing the general public to be well-informed about scientific concepts. For example, Dr Imogen breaks down the research surrounding long term side effects of vaccines using a milkshake analogy! https://www.tiktok.com/@imi_imogen1/video/7027448207823211777?is_copy_url=1&is_from_webapp=v1&lang=en On the other hand, this phenomenon can have pretty serious ramifications, with many individuals feeling rightfully confused about what the truth really is, when there appears to be so many versions of it posted across the internet. Following a rather controversial study on Ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19, the internet was soon buzzing with excitement about the prospect of a drug that many believed could replace the need for a vaccine. Despite numerous gaps in the original study, and countless further studies refuting Invermectin’s ability to treat COVID-19, many social media users are continuing to spread this myth online. Both governments and hospitals alike have been accused of hiding a seemingly “good” cure from their citizens. In Texas, a group of doctors won a legal case which allowed Texas Huguley Hospital to refuse administering Ivermectin to a COVID-19 infected Deputy Sheriff. This sparked outrage on Facebook, with users and the Sheriff’s wife demanding greater freedoms over their medical treatments, instead of just relying on the judgement of doctors and hospital staff. In this instance, the misinformation surrounding Ivermectin is not only influencing individuals to seek out futile treatments, but it is also spreading mistrust with the science and medical communities, who work incredibly hard to protect the world, particularly over the past two years. Despite Ivermectin being used in a clinical setting to treat parasitic (not viral) infections in humans for a number of years now, it can be extremely dangerous for individuals to have complete power over their medical treatments. The dosage and timing of treatment is crucial in ensuring success. Just like with everyday medications such as paracetamol, taking Ivermectin in high doses is risky. A COVID-19 infected woman from Sydney who read about Ivermectin on social media took a very high dosage of the drug after purchasing it from an online seller, which resulted in severe diarrhea and vomiting. In order to combat some of this misinformation, a number of social media platforms are “fact checking” posts or providing warnings on posts with keywords, such as ‘COVID-19’ or ‘vaccination.’ On Instagram, each post with these keywords will contain a banner at the bottom inviting users to visit their “COVID-19 Information Centre,” which provides a list of information supported by WHO and UNICEF about how vaccines are of high-standard, well-researched, and generally resulting in mild side effects. In addition, on Facebook, posts identified to be spreading mistruths will provide users with websites explaining the truth, before they can access the original posts. However, these warnings and fact-checks can only go so far. Posts blindly supporting the use of Ivermectin, falsely reporting side effects of vaccines, and arguing that masks cannot block virus particles still circulate the internet. Often those most vulnerable in the community are at risk of being led astray with misinformation. In principle, evidence-based, concise, easy-to-understand science communication is essential to break down the barrier between research and the general public, ensuring that citizens are well-informed and more comfortable about the world around them. In the situation of a public health crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic, this communication is crucial in ensuring that all citizens can remain well-informed, safe and healthy. Misinformation and dodgy studies can not only lead people astray, but also cost them their health and wellbeing. References: 1. Kathleen McGarvey, “Historian John Barry compares COVID-19 to the 1918 flu pandemic,” University of Rochester, October 6, 2020. https://www.rochester.edu/newscenter/historian-john-barry-compares-covid-19-to-1918-flu-pandemic-454732/ 2. Kathleen McGarvey, “Historian John Barry compares COVID-19 to the 1918 flu pandemic,” University of Rochester, October 6, 2020. https://www.rochester.edu/newscenter/historian-john-barry-compares-covid-19-to-1918-flu-pandemic-454732/ 3. Brian Dolan, Unmasking History: Who Was Behind the Anti-Mask League Protests During the 1918 Influenza Epidemic in San Francisco? Perspectives in Medical Humanities (San Francisco: UC Medical Humanities Consortium, 2020) Previous article back to DISORDER Next article

< Back to Issue 7 Tip of the Iceberg: An Overview of Cancer Treatment Breakthroughs by Arwen Nguyen-Ngo 22 October 2024 edited by Zeinab Jishi illustrated by Louise Cen Throughout the history of science, there have been many firsts. Anaximander, a Greek scholar, was the first person to suggest the idea of evolution. Contrary to popular belief, the Montgolfier brothers were the pioneers of human flight by their invention of the hot air balloon, as opposed to another pair of brothers, the Wright brothers. In 1976, the first ever vaccine was created by an English doctor, who tested his theory in a rather peculiar manner that would not be approved by today’s ethics guidelines (Rocheleau, 2020). While there have been many extraordinary discoveries, there continue to be many firsts and many breakthroughs that have pathed the way for the next steps in research. In particular is research into ground-breaking treatments for cancer patients. 1890s: Radiotherapy (Gianfaldoni, S., Gianfaldoni, R., Wollina, U., Lotti, J., Tchernev, G., & Lotti, T. 2017) In the last decade of the 19th century, Wilhelm Conrad Rцntgen made the discovery of X-rays, drastically changing the medical scene for treating many diseases. From this discovery, Emil Herman Grubbe commenced the first X-ray treatment for breast cancer, while Antoine Henri Becquerel began to delve deeper into researching radioactivity and its natural sources. In the same year that Rцntgen discovered X-rays, Maria Sklodowska-Curie and Pierre Curie shared theirs vows together, and only three years later, discovered radium as a source for radiation. By then, during a time where skin cancers were frequently treated, this discovery had kick-started the research field into X-rays as well as the use of X-rays in the medical field. Scientists and clinicians have gained a greater understanding of radiation as treatment for diseases, but the research does not stop there and the advancement of radiotherapy only continues to thrive. 1940s: First Bone Marrow Transplant (Morena & Gatti, 2011) Following World War II, the physical consequences of war accelerated research into tissue transplantation. Skin grafts were needed for burn victims, blood transfusions needed ABO blood typing, and the high doses of radiation led to marrow failure and death. During this time, Peter Medawar started his research into rejection of skin grafts as requested by the Medical Research Council during World War II. It was a priority for the treatment of burn victims. Medawar had concluded that graft rejection was a result of an immunological phenomenon related to histocompatibility antigens. Histocompatibility antigens are cell surface glycoproteins that play critical roles in interactions with immune cells. They are unique to every individual and essentially flags one’s cell as their own, therefore making every individual physically unique. 1953: First Human Tumour Cured In 1953, Roy Hertz and Min Chiu Li used a drug, methotrexate, to treat the first human tumour — a patient with choriocarcinoma. Choriocarcinoma is an aggressive neoplastic trophoblastic disease, and can be categorised into two types — gestational and non-gestational (Bishop & Edemekong, 2023). The cancer primarily affects women, as it grows aggressively in a woman’s uterus (MedlinePlus., 2024). However, it can also occur in men as part of a mixed germ cell tumour (Bishop & Edemekong, 2023). Methotrexate is commonly used in chemotherapy as it acts as an antifolate antimetabolite that induces a cytotoxic effect on cells. Once methotrexate is taken up by cells, it forms methotrexate-polyglutamate, which in turn inhibits dihydrofolate reductase, an enzyme important for DNA and RNA synthesis (Hanood & Mittal, 2023). Therefore, by inhibiting DNA synthesis, the drug induces a cytotoxic effect on the cancerous cells. Since the first cure of choriocarcinoma using methotrexate, the drug has both been commonly used for chemotherapy and other applications, including as an immunosuppressant for autoimmune diseases (Hanoodi & Mittal, 2023). 1997: First ever targeted drug: rituximab (Pierpont, Limper, & Richards, 2018) Jumping ahead a few decades and 1997 was the year that JK Rowling published Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone . It was also the year that the first targeted anti-cancer drug was approved by the U.S Food and Drug Administration (FDA), rituximab. Ronald Levy created rituximab with the purpose of targeting malignant B cells. B cells express an antigen – CD20 – which allows B cells to develop and differentiate. Rituximab is an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, meaning that it targets the CD20 antigens expressed on malignant B cells. It had improved the progression-free survival and overall survival rates of many patients who had been diagnosed with B cell leukemias and lymphomas (Pavlasova & Mraz, 2020). Much like the Philosopher’s Stone, you may consider rituximab to increase longevity of patients diagnosed with B cell cancers. Although Levy created this drug, his predecessors should not be ignored. Prior to his research and development of rituximab, research and development of monoclonal antibodies can be dated all the way back to the late 1970s (Pavlasova & Mraz, 2020). César Milstein and Georges J. F. Köhler developed the first monoclonal antibody in the mid-1970s, and first described the method for generating large amounts of monoclonal antibodies (Leavy, 2016). Milstein and Köhler were able to achieve this by producing a hybridoma – “ a cell that can be grown in culture and that produces immunoglobulins that all have the same sequence of amino acids and consequently the same affinity for only one epitope on an antigen that has been chosen by the investigator” (Crowley & Kyte, 2014). They had produced a cell with origins from a myeloma cell line and spleen cells from mice immunised against sheep red blood cells (Leavy, 2016). Going forward: CAR T Cells The most recent and exciting development in cancer research has been the development and usage of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells. CAR T cell therapy is a unique therapy customised to each individual patient, as the CAR T cells used are derived from the patient’s own T cells. The process involves leukapheresis, where the patient’s T cells are collected, and these collected T cells are then re-engineered to include the CAR gene. The patient’s own CAR T cells are produced, expanded and subsequently infused back into the patient. The first concept of CAR T cells to be described was in 1987 by Yoshihisa Kuwana and others in Japan. Following this, different generations of CAR T cells have now been developed and trialled, leading to the FDA’s first two approvals for CAR T cells (Wikipedia Contributors, 2024). This research avenue has only scratched the surface, with many individuals now exploring the best collection methods and how best to stimulate the “fittest” T cells - the apex predator of immune cells. A recent paper was published where CAR T cells were trialled as a second line therapy to follow ibrutinib-treated blood cancers. The phase 2 TARMAC study involved using anti-CD19 CAR T cells to treat patients with relapsed mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) who had been exposed to ibrutinib, a drug used to treat B cell cancers by targeting Bruton Kinase Tyrosine (BTK) found in B cells. The study showed that 80% of patients who had previous exposure to ibrutinib and were treated with CAR T cells as a second-line therapy achieved a complete response. Furthermore, at the 13-month follow-up, the 12-month progression free survival rate was estimated to be 75% and the overall survival rate to be 100% (Minson et al., 2024)! It is without a doubt that as humans, we are naturally curious creatures. It is with this curiosity that we have journeyed through the many scientific breakthroughs and innovations. And within each special nook and cranny of countless fields of science, from flight to evolution, from vaccines to cancer treatments, there have been multitudes of discoveries. There is no doubt that the number of innovations will only continue to grow. References Bishop, B., & Edemekong, P. (2023). Choriocarcinoma. StatPearls . Crowley, T., & Kyte, J. (2014). Section 1 - Purification and characterization of ferredoxin-NADP+ reductase from chloroplasts of S. oleracea . In Experiments in the Purification and Characterization of Enzymes (pp. 25–102). Gianfaldoni, S., Gianfaldoni, R., Wollina, U., Lotti, J., Tchernev, G., & Lotti, T. (2017). An overview on radiotherapy: From its history to its current applications in dermatology. Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences, 5 (4), 521–525. https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2017.122 Hanoodi, M., & Mittal, M. (2023). Methotrexate. StatPearls . Leavy, O. (2016). The birth of monoclonal antibodies. Nature Immunology, 17 (Suppl 1), S13. https://doi.org/10.1038/ni.3608 MedlinePlus. (2024). Choriocarcinoma. MedlinePlus . https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/001496.htm#:~:text=Choriocarcinoma%20is%20a%20fast%2Dgrowing,pregnancy%20to%20feed%20the%20fetus Minson, A., Hamad, N., Cheah, C. Y., Tam, C., Blombery, P., Westerman, D., Ritchie, D., Morgan, H., Holzwart, N., Lade, S., Anderson, M. A., Khot, A., Seymour, J. F., Robertson, M., Caldwell, I., Ryland, G., Saghebi, J., Sabahi, Z., Xie, J., Koldej, R., & Dickinson, M. (2024). CAR T cells and time-limited ibrutinib as treatment for relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma: The phase 2 TARMAC study. Blood, 143 (8), 673–684. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood.2023021306 Morena, M., & Gatti, R. (2011). A history of bone marrow transplantation. Haematology/Oncology Clinics, 21 (1), 1–15. Pavlasova, G., & Mraz, M. (2020). The regulation and function of CD20: An "enigma" of B-cell biology and targeted therapy. Haematologica, 105 (6), 1494–1506. https://doi.org/10.3324/haematol.2019.243543 Pierpont, T. M., Limper, C. B., & Richards, K. L. (2018). Past, present, and future of rituximab: The world’s first oncology monoclonal antibody therapy. Frontiers in Oncology, 8 , 163. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2018.00163 Rocheleau, J. (2020). 50 famous firsts from science history. Stacker . https://stacker.com/environment/50-famous-firsts-science-history Wikipedia contributors. (2024, October 6). CAR T cell. In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia . Retrieved October 17, 2024, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CAR_T_cell&oldid=1249695600 Previous article Next article apex back to

By Andrew Lim From Fusion to Submarines: A Nuclear Year By Andrew Lim 23 March 2022 Edited by Tanya Kovacevic Illustrated by Quynh Anh Nguyen A press conference in April, pledging millions of dollars to nuclear medicine. A university address in November, rethinking Australia’s nuclear attitudes. A fusion reaction in December, promising a clean energy revolution. No matter where you were or who you were listening to, the world of nuclear science was inescapable in 2022. It has been a year of great progress and, at times, even greater controversy – pairing milestone triumphs and landmark facilities with old fears and vast challenges. So, what has defined the year in nuclear science – and what comes next? Powering the Future Image 1: LLNL’s National Ignition Facility, where the successful fusion ignition experiment was conducted in December. Perhaps the year’s most eye-catching discovery came near its end. On 13th December, scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in California announced that for the first time, they had produced more energy out of a nuclear fusion reaction than they had put in. It seemed to herald the beginnings of a new era – nuclear power without toxic nuclear waste. However, to report this as the USA’s civilian nuclear energy story of the year perhaps fails to capture the whole picture. It’s an important discovery, sure, but it stands on another development, far less well known: the congressional funding battles of the preceding months. Crafted from intense negotiations led by Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Senators Todd Young (R-IN), Mark Warner (D-VA) and John Cornyn (R-TX), the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act (1) authorized and appropriated funds for nuclear research en masse. It provided everything from a five-year $50 million p.a. plan for “Foundational Nuclear Science” (2), to a $1.09 billion Electron Ion Collider (3) and a “National Nuclear University Research Infrastructure Reinvestment” scheme that included LLNL (4). Even private sector fission work received a boost in the form of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (5), built on a compromise between Schumer and Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), allocating billions of dollars in tax credits and loan guarantees for the sector. These funding boosts (and their predecessors), the work of years of lobbying and negotiations across multiple political factions, helped create the environment necessary for this research to thrive – and the breakthrough is as much a reminder of their importance as a triumph of nuclear physics. Health and Safety Image 2: Prime Minister the Hon Scott Morrison MP, flanked by Health Minister the Hon Greg Hunt MP (L) and backbencher Gladys Liu MP (R), announces a $23 million APME grant in April. The year’s nuclear focus extended into the medical sector, too. President Biden’s 2022 State of the Union address announced an appeal beyond partisan lines, one pillar of which was the use of the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H) to “drive breakthroughs in cancer” (6). His call was answered in budget appropriations bills, funding accelerators and reactors to research new radioisotopes, while also investigating safer handling methods for natural and artificial nuclear sources (7). Such emphases echoed as far away as our antipodean shores. While Australia may already produce 80% of the radioisotopes used in its own nuclear medical procedures (8), both major parties took 2022 to advance nuclear medicine production. In April, the Coalition government launched new grants for the Australian Precision Medicine Enterprise (APME) in Melbourne, with the Hon Greg Hunt MP, then Minister for Health, declaring nuclear medicine “the next stage of precision medicine.” (9) Mere months later, in the October Budget, his Labor successor the Hon Mark Butler MP pledged funds for medical supplies of Gallium-67 (10). Across party lines, nuclear innovation became key to funding in the health sector. Securing Tomorrow Image 3: Australian Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defence Richard Marles (L) meets with US Secretary of Defence Lloyd J Austin III (R) at the Pentagon to discuss AUKUS submarine arrangements in December. All that said, no article about nuclear science, especially these days, would be complete without a discussion of AUKUS. In late October, an interview with Australian Vice Admiral Jonathan Mead was published in The Australian, in which he underscored the importance of building a nuclear workforce – that is, building the educational pathways required to produce all the crews, builders, architects, regulators and scientists a nuclear submarine capability would entail (11). With Australia’s first nuclear submarine captains likely in high school, the infrastructure needed to train them simply doesn’t exist – and time is running out. This urgency was emphasised by academics at ANU, home of the only postgraduate qualifications dedicated to nuclear science in the country. In November, Vice-Chancellor Brian Schmidt AC spoke of an approaching “transformation in Australia’s cultural relationship” with nuclear science (12). In December, Dr AJ Mitchell, an ANU academic leading the development of a national program for nuclear science and education, reiterated Schmidt’s arguments. In comments provided to The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age, he advocated for a “sovereign capability…start[ing] yesterday,” to ensure an Australian nuclear workforce capable of meeting requirements not only for defence but also for health, regulation, space exploration and much more (13). However, this attitude was not without controversy. In today’s world, where the word ‘nuclear’ carries connotations of Chernobyl, Fukushima, and the Cold War, increased nuclear funding (even if only to regulatory or medical bodies) often sparks fear in the public imagination. In response to Mitchell’s comments, A/Prof Peter Christoff, a University of Melbourne climate policy researcher, expressed worries about increased “anxiety in our region”. More than anything else, this perhaps underscores the biggest issue facing the nuclear sector: the long-held apprehensions from media, governments and beyond that can often lump anything vaguely nuclear – from medication to missiles – under the same roof. What's Next? Image 4: US President Joe Biden delivering his 2023 State of the Union Address, advocating for increased cancer research funding, flanked by Vice-President Kamala Harris (L) and Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R). Over the first months of 2023, the tense balancing acts and decisions of the past year have only continued to grow. In the USA, President Biden’s 2023 State of the Union speech, delivered in early February, saw him reinvigorate his call to “end cancer as we know it” (14) – the same call that led to all that radioisotope funding last year. However, Biden faces a Republican House of Representatives seemingly hell-bent on blocking his legislation. With the resultant impasse threatening a wholescale government shutdown, the funding necessary for scientific leaps of the kind seen in 2022 remains in doubt. On the Australian front, our lack of a ready nuclear workforce is causing jitters amongst our allies – with leaked letters from US Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and James Inhofe (R-OK) expressing concern to the Biden administration about Australia relying on American production lines for stopgap submarines. Australian Defence Minister Richard Marles spent the December-January period allaying these concerns with the support of US Representatives Joe Courtney (D-CT-02) and Mike Gallagher (R-WI-08) while in the US and UK, but the issue is certain to remain a hot topic for this year. Even closer to home, Rio Tinto’s loss of a Caesium-137 capsule in Western Australia captured the imaginations of people across the nation and the world. At once it seemed to represent the long-standing fear of nuclear research and its importance in fuelling the same regulatory efforts that helped track down the capsule. Perhaps more than a story of scientific discoveries, of neutrons, protons and physics, the story of nuclear science in 2022 and beyond is the story of people. Of those legislators and politicians, balancing visions of the future with messy political compromises. Of those scientists and researchers, balancing plans and facilities with the capacity of their institutions. Of us, the ordinary public, balancing long-held phobias with exciting aspirations. Will we meet the challenges that lie before us? Are we ready to have a nuanced discussion about how we want to use our nuclear knowledge? Can we balance the possibilities of the future with the fears of the past? Well... that’s entirely up to us. Andrew Lim is an Editor and Feature Writer with OmniSci Magazine and spent the summer as a Summer Research Scholar at the Australian National University’s Heavy Ion Accelerator Facility, working on studying nuclear structure through particle transfer reactions. Image Credits (in order): Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; Monash University; US Department of Defence; The White House Author's Note Between the submission of this article in late February and its publication in mid-March, a notable development took place, one that necessitated this additional note. On March 14, at an announcement held in San Diego, President Biden, Prime Minister Albanese and Prime Minister Sunak revealed plans for Australia to purchase three to five American Virginia-class submarines in the early 2030s. The Royal Navy and the Royal Australian Navy would then work out of their shipyards to develop and produce new SSN-AUKUS submarines (based off plans for successors to the British Astute-class models), coming into service in the late 2030s. If anything, this timeline accentuates the dramatic expansions required from Australia’s nuclear workforce, as presented in the original article. Meanwhile, the narrative that surrounded the announcement – one solely focussed on nuclear research’s military capabilities (and, at that, often conflating nuclear weaponry with nuclear power) – seems only to indicate the same throughlines of 2022 repeating themselves in the year to come…and nuanced and subtle discussion of nuclear research being left for another day. References CHIPS and Science Act, Pub L No 117-167, 136 Stat 1366 (2022). See ibid, div B tit I § 10102(d), 136 Stat 1415-6. See ibid, div B tit I § 10107, 136 Stat 1449-50, esp. sub-s (b)(4). See ibid, div B subtitle L § 10741-5, 136 Stat 1718-21. Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, Pub L No 117-169, 136 Stat 1818. The White House Office of the Press Secretary, Remarks by President Biden in State of the Union Address. March 2, 2022. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/03/02/remarks-by-president-biden-in-state-of-the-union-address/ See House Committee on Appropriations, Report to Accompany H.R. 8295, H.R. Rep No 117-403 (2022), esp. at 65, 104, 235, 238. Taylor A, Birmingham S and Hunt G, Safeguarding the future of critical medicine supply [Media Release]. September 30, 2021. https://www.minister.industry.gov.au/ministers/taylor/media-releases/safeguarding-future-critical-medicine-supply. “Precision medicine is the ‘future of medicine’: Greg Hunt”. The Australian. April 4, 2022. https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/precision-medicine-is-the-future-of-medicine-greg-hunt/video/9ec9b0942bfb18757e3fbf4f3e95e0f4 Garvey, P. “Butler steps in to ease nuclear medicine crisis”. The Australian. October 27, 2022. Nicholson, B. “Defence Special Report: Cultivating a Nuclear Mindset”. The Australian. October 27, 2022. ANU Communications & Engagement, Building Australia’s AUKUS-ready nuclear workforce: Address by Professor Brian Schmidt AC. November 9, 2022. Mannix, L. “‘Cherish’ the power: Physicists issue call to arms over nuclear skills gap”. The Sydney Morning Herald. December 28, 2022. https://www.smh.com.au/national/cherish-the-power-physicists-issue-call-to-arms-over-nuclear-skills-gap-20221228-p5c92s.html The White House Office of the Press Secretary, Remarks by President Biden in State of the Union Address. February 7, 2023. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/02/07/remarks-by-president-biden-in-state-of-the-union-address-2/ Previous article Next article

< Back to Issue 2 Spirituality and Science Science is limited by the philosophies which govern it. Common thinking is that science is a rigid, cold and largely academic field which sneers at the domain of spirituality. I posit that one must move beyond this point of view in order to do good science, and to find the true aims and values of the discipline. by Hamish Payne 10 December 2021 Edited by Irene Yonsuh Lee & Khoa-Anh Tran Illustrated by Quynh Anh Nguyen When I was fifteen, I thought that I could thwart my English teacher. He had given us homework that was simple enough; discuss with our families whether true altruism exists. I did not have this discussion with my household but instead hosted the debate in my head, coming to a measured conclusion. However, the privacy of my argumentation showed the next day when my teacher asked me to share. He immediately suggested that I had only been thinking by myself and had not welcomed others into my discussion. This is not my most interesting story, but it did teach me something important: every thought that I have had contains traces of me. Even when I am fiercely debating contrary viewpoints on a subject, even when I am having my most dissonant thoughts, it is my own voice against which I argue. Whenever I have drawn my pen across the page, I have been leaving my fingerprints in the ink. At the time, these traces of me made me very uncomfortable. I have always heard that the beauty in science is that it does not matter if it is considered in isolation or in consultation with others; its facts and its theorems are invariant. This vision of science as a haven for unchanging logic was popularised by Descartes. For the cartesian, the body is split from nature, allowing one to consider the latter more sterilely. But the mind is also split from the body, and our talents, ambitions and passions are split apart in our minds. This thinking for centuries has spurred enormous strides forward in physical technology and has made humanity feel in control of our environment largely because the cartesian divide heralds natural determinism wherein each phenomenon has a direct and exploitable cause[1]. However, there is no room for individual expression in the Cartesian framework – no place for perception, experience, or spirituality. Though my retelling is likely apocryphal, the story of Galileo serves in my mind as a symbol of this divide. From the instant Galileo sought to place the sun at the centre of our solar system, he toppled the heavens and was thus persecuted by the purveyors of spirituality. The persecution of both the scientist and his heliocentric principle barred faith and belief from the scientific process and hence placed reason and logic at its centre. Yet it should not be forgotten that the clergy of the Roman Inquisition paid Galileo in kind and forbad the scientist a spirit. But what are the consequences of taking such a divided view of nature? When I hear people talk about scientists today, they treat the scientist not as someone who lives but as someone who develops rules about life. Scientists must never strive for innate beauty, but for inert truth, guided by cold logic – even Oscar Wilde wrote that “the advantage of science is that it is emotionless”[2]. As a continuation of Galileo being branded apostate, the scientist has been stripped of the right to ambiguity in his explanations, and uncertainty in his world view. If science is not complete, it is deemed a failure. But this is ludicrous. Any scientist must know and accept that the cartesian split neglects certain aspects of the world – those properties of a system which emerge only when all its parts are combined. Moreover, nature still eludes science on a very deep level. For example, there is still no widely accepted philosophical explanation of quantum mechanics, no ability to predict the chaotic flow of a surging river, no profound understanding of the synchronisation of heart cells. Science is so woefully incomplete and incapable of dealing with the sheer scale of disorder in the world that most real-world systems must undergo several fundamental simplifications to be modelled, lest they take years to understand. And when things are cut apart, it becomes even more difficult to stitch them back into the complete picture. Then what remains of the aims of science if it is only an imitation of nature – a painting with no colours, shadows on the wall? When I ask myself this question, I find Feynman’s words echo back in my head: doing science is no more than thinking about “the inconceivable nature of nature”[3]. Science seeks to connect us with nature. It is not about disassembling it and organising it, splitting it into more and more isolated pieces, but about marvelling at the whole system, attempting to let it all sit in your mind - to look at the dancing shadows and understand what is casting them, enjoying the dance all the same. Likewise, in his book, Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos, Steven Strogatz humorously lists life under the list of unexplored scientific domains[4]. He does not relegate, however, science to its usual, removed, and sterilised place in this. Instead, he suggests that nature is so complex, that one cannot help but marvel at it with no real hope of controlling or quantifying it. I argue that these two scientists are just as much talking about what it means to be spiritual as scientific. To be spiritual is to try relentlessly to understand our life and our world and their relationship, even as they mercurially shift and change. Simply put, spirituality arises from a profound connection with nature. For example, the unity of the mind and the natural world is the bedrock of Eastern mysticism. The discipline seeks to connect the two through considered meditation and direly avoids their division. Such is highlighted by the Buddhist philosopher Asvaghosha; “When the mind is disturbed, the multiplicity of things is produced, but when the mind is quieted, the multiplicity of things disappears.” Western religions similarly connect nature and the spirit. Polytheistic traditions like the ancient Greek and Roman ascribe to their gods an element of the world each to control. The communication of the individual with a god is thus the interaction of the individual with the natural world. Similarly, the God of Judaism, Christianity and Islam is often present in awesome acts of nature. Particularly in the oldest parts of the Bible, God is seen to communicate through natural disasters and great floods and great fish and plagues and pestilences. Whilst I must admit that this analysis is somewhat superficial, it certainly illustrates the place nature holds deep in our minds and mythology. In an overwhelming number of cases, nature begets spirituality. Science is likewise born of nature and, for me at least, is therefore spiritual. But the value in reclassifying science as something spiritual as well as logical is not argumentation for naught. The scientist who is spiritual and fully connected with nature is better equipped than any. Guarding the connection between the individual and nature as sacred allows us to question our world on a more fundamental, truer level. Take as an example a question I hear often in my studies of physics: “Why is this theorem true?” Whilst it sounds reasonable enough, this type of question leads its asker down a reductionistic rabbit hole, in pitting mathematics against nature. Instead of seeing mathematics as a tool to describe nature, nature is seen as a product of mathematics. The rich physical world is reduced into rigidly true or false statements when we know such dichotomies are severely inept in the real world. Perhaps the scientist who is more holistically, spiritually connected with nature would be prompted to ask instead: “How true is this theorem to the world?” One does not have to look far to see how this subtle shift in approach to science can be incredibly successful. A fundamental principle of quantum physics states that matter is simultaneously particle-like and wave-like. This ambiguity in physical explanation, which would not be allowed from a cartesian point of view, is acceptable because it matches completely what is observed rather than attempting to reduce nature into the language of mathematics. Werner Heisenberg even wrote that “we cannot speak about atoms in ordinary language”, demonstrating the need for scientific holism. Approaching scientific discovery from a spiritual perspective allows us to move beyond the constraints of a reductive language. Likewise, studying science increases our spiritual relationship with nature. Albert Camus, perhaps rather unknowingly, said much the same thing in his unpublished novel, La Mort Heureuse. The protagonist, Mersault, on the brink of his death, says of the red, sunset clouds: “When I was young, my mother told me that [the clouds] were the souls of the dead who were travelling to Heaven. I was amazed that my soul was red. Now I know that it’s more likely the promise of wind. But that’s just as marvelous.”[5] What is spiritual is natural. Intellectual curiosity is rooted in the physical world, even as it changes and develops, becomes completely chaotic and throws more and more unanswerable questions in our faces. Science persists not because it seeks to provide answers to all of life’s questions, but because it provokes the mind into deeper questioning and, in that, deeper connection with nature and its ineffable, uncapturable beauty. The most marvellous thing about taking this perspective is that the science I do becomes more personal and ignites a stronger passion. I no longer must worry about the traces of myself; they are a necessary part of my understanding of the world and have shown me that, although science is “emotionless” in its methodology, it should not be so in its execution. Science is not spiritual because it precludes knowledge that is born from blind faith, but because it pushes knowledge to somewhere that is deeply human and that is beyond faith. References: [1] Fritjof Capra. 2000. The Tao of Physics : An Exploration of the Parallels between Modern Physics and Eastern Mysticism. 35th Anniversary Edition. Boston: Shambhala. [2] Wilde, Oscar. (1890) 2018. The Picture of Dorian Gray. New York, Ny: Olive Editions. [3] Feynman, Richard. 1983. “Fun to Imagine with Richard Feynman.” Documentary. BBC. [4] Strogatz, Steven H. (2014) 2019. Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos : With Applications to Physics, Biology, Chemistry, and Engineering. Second. Boca Raton: Crc Press. [5] Camus, Albert. (1971) 2010. La Mort Hereuse. Paris: Gallimard. Previous article back to DISORDER Next article

By Lily McCann < Back to Issue 3 Belly bugs: the aliens that live in our gut By Lily McCann 10 September 2022 Edited by Andrew Lim and Zhiyou Low Illustrated by Helena Pantsis Next Figure 1 (1): "Animalcules" The figures above may look exceedingly simple to you. Beautifully drawn, yes, but nothing particularly complicated —mere ovals and lines of black ink. If I told you that the drawings were 350 years old, your interest might be piqued by that fascination we hold for all historical relics. You might wonder what the images are attempting to portray. You would only be more confused, however, were I to describe them to you using the name they were known by to the artist: “animalcules”. (2) These drawings, penned by a Dutch draughtsman in the early 1680s, are the first known depictions of bacteria from inside a human body (2). They were discovered by a man called Anthonie van Leeuwenhoek in a sample taken from between his teeth. Leeuwenhoek had examined “animalcules” in various water samples before turning to saliva, analysing the shape and movements of the little cells beneath his microscope, which he made from hand-crafted glass mounted between plates of brass. It is now known that these “animalcules” are in fact bacteria, and that they are avid colonisers not only of our mouths but every other body surface, too. These single-celled organisms parted ways with animals some 2.7 billion years ago in evolution and could not appear any more alien to ourselves (3). Though simple in structure and function, they are capable of populating the most inhospitable and extraterrestrial of environments. In fact, Deinococcus radiodurans (pictured below) can survive for years in the harsh vacuum of space (4). Figure 2 (5): Deinococcus radiodurans Freaky, right? The evolutionary distance between bacteria and ourselves does not seem to deter them from entering into the most intimate of symbiotic relationships with us. Despite their alien-ness, despite billions of years of divergent evolution, we have not lost the ability to communicate with these distant relatives of ours. In fact, communication with bacteria is a daily and essential part of our lives. The reason we can still chat with these creatures is that they are made up of the same basic “stuff” that we are: genetic material made of sugars, phosphates and nitrogen bases to dictate our functions; proteins to carry out our cellular processes; membranes to hold us together. All these aspects form a common basis for language. Just as human languages consist of orally transmitted units of sounds that can be translated and understood, bacteria can impart signals in the form of particles that can be decoded and acted upon by our own cells. One example of this kind of dialogue is the production of molecules called short chain fatty acids by bacteria that digest plant materials in our gut. These bacteria impart their gratitude to us for supplying them with suitable foods by releasing short chain fatty acids, which in turn tell our gut not to worry, signalling our cells and instructing them to reduce inflammation, build up our gut wall and even help fix our blood pressure. These molecules can also travel to the brain, where they are thought to influence the release of various signals including that of the “feel-good” hormone serotonin. (6) There’s a whole world of dialogue beyond this often referred to as the gut-brain axis of health. Research into the area has revealed that signals produced by gut bacteria are extremely influential in a number of conditions including anxiety and Parkinson’s disease. These relationships often work both ways, giving rise to a strange “chicken-and-egg” situation: those who demonstrate symptoms of such conditions are found to carry altered gut bacterial populations, and altering gut bacteria can in turn change symptoms. For example, in a cruel experiment involving the separation of infant monkeys from their mothers, the stress caused by separation changed the distribution of bacteria colonies in the infants’ guts, whilst administering a certain bacteria often imparted to infants by their mothers was found to reverse the symptoms of this stress (7). The way that bacteria can change our very emotions has significant implications for our idea of personhood. What are we, if how we act depends on the alien cells we carry in our digestive tracts? Perhaps we ought to extend our definition of identity to include these little cells that are truly, it seems, a part of how we are—another organ of our body, even. Happily (for those of you who support the philosophy of a ‘growth mindset’), the way our gut influences our minds is subject to manipulation. And we do not need a scientist to isolate and administer a certain bacterial species to us in order to change it; evidence suggests that simply altering what we eat can have a profound influence. Dietary change is known to directly alter bacterial gut colonies, and the change shown to bring about the most harmonious of conversations with our gut is increasing our intake of dietary fibre. Flooding our gut community with plentiful fibre causes a rush of signals from bacteria that promote gut health, mental health and healthy ageing. In contrast, a low fibre diet can promote diabetes, cardiovascular problems and, for pregnant mothers, may compromise the neural functioning of a developing child (8). What does this mean for medicine? Can we harness the billion-year old dialogue between our cells and the aliens that colonise our gut for our own benefit? Can we coax these residents into a mutually beneficial relationship by approaching them in the right tone? These questions are gradually gaining popularity among the scientific community as trials of probiotic administration are explored in the context of treating illnesses from depression to gastrointestinal disorders (9). We are yet to see where such studies will lead us. When the outside world seems increasingly bleak, I find comfort in the fact that within us rumbles on the activity of an intricate and disinterested universe, completely alien to and yet an integral part of ourselves. Like farmers of a garden in times of shortage, we exist in a state of codependency with the world we nurture inside our bodies. If we foster a good relationship with its inhabitants, they can protect us from the afflictions of illness, sadness and madness that threaten our species day by day. References : 1. The Royal Society. Bacteria from Leeuwenhoek's mouth [Internet]. 2022 [cited 17 March 2022]. Available from: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/cms/asset/2bf20f9f-28e1-4126-bd7e-f92950899a2b/rstb20140344f03.jpg 2. Lane N. The unseen world: reflections on Leeuwenhoek (1677) ‘Concerning little animals’ | Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences [Internet]. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2022 [cited 17 April 2022]. Available from: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rstb.2014.0344 3. Cooper G. The Origin and Evolution of Cells [Internet]. Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. 2022 [cited 17 April 2022]. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK9841/#:~:text=The%20eukaryotes%20developed%20at%20least,is%20from%20present%2Dday%20eukaryotes 4. Cox M, Battista J. Deinococcus radiodurans — the consummate survivor. Nature Reviews Microbiology. 2005;3(11):882-892. 5. 5. The European Synchroton. Deinococcus radiodurans [Internet]. 2022 [cited 5 May 2022]. Available from: https://www.esrf.fr/UsersAndScience/Experiments/MX/Research_and_Development/Biology/Deinococcus_radiodurans 6. De Angelis M, Piccolo M, Vannini L, Siragusa S, De Giacomo A, Serrazzanetti D et al. Fecal Microbiota and Metabolome of Children with Autism and Pervasive Developmental Disorder Not Otherwise Specified. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(10):e76993. 7. Bailey M, Coe C. Maternal separation disrupts the integrity of the intestinal microflora in infant rhesus monkeys. Developmental Psychobiology. 1999;35(2):146-155. 8. Buffington S, Di Prisco G, Auchtung T, Ajami N, Petrosino J, Costa-Mattioli M. Microbial Reconstitution Reverses Maternal Diet-Induced Social and Synaptic Deficits in Offspring. Cell. 2016;165(7):1762-1775. 9. Kazemi A, Noorbala A, Azam K, Eskandari M, Djafarian K. Effect of probiotic and prebiotic vs placebo on psychological outcomes in patients with major depressive disorder: A randomized clinical trial. Clinical Nutrition. 2019;38(2):522-528. Previous article Next article alien back to

< Back to Issue 8 Functional Neurological Disorder by Esme MacGillivray 3 June 2025 Edited by Steph Liang Illustrated by Esme MacGillivray Content warning: Please be aware that this article includes discussion of mental illness, medical malpractice, and ableism. Functional Neurological Disorder (FND) is very simple to explain. It is a problem with how the brain functions. More specifically, it is a problem with how the brain sends and receives messages, resulting in diverse motor, sensory, and cognitive symptoms. But unlike other neurological conditions, FND does not appear to be caused by any identifiable structural damage to the nervous system. As a catchy metaphor: the brain is a computer, and FND is a ‘software’ problem as opposed to a ‘hardware’ problem. If that all feels frustratingly vague, I’m afraid you are out of luck — but in good company. Since developing FND a year and a half ago, I’ve become closely acquainted with confusion. My own body has felt alien sometimes, and the way others have reacted to my disability has been equally disorientating. Instead of accepting that neuroscience is yet to make sense of FND, many people — including medical professionals — rush to dismiss symptoms, or question their very existence. Understanding this condition is not just a matter of advancing scientific knowledge. Judgement and shame must be replaced with compassion. Turns out FND is far from simple to explain. Symptoms often develop rapidly and ‘out of nowhere’, most typically in adolescence or adulthood (1). These can include functional tics, non-epileptic seizures, limb weakness, paralysis, gait disorders, and speech difficulties (2). The list goes on. From the array of possible symptoms alone, it is clear that FND encompasses a broad range of presentations. Fluctuation and inconsistency can exist even within an individual’s experience. Most days, I appear completely ‘normal’. Sometimes, my disability is glaringly obvious. My FND is confusing and isolating; because there is so little information available, it is difficult to get the support I need. It doesn’t help that myths about this condition are rife within both medical and everyday settings, despite it being one of the most common diagnoses made by neurologists (3). I would like to dispel the idea that FND is just a fancy way of saying that doctors have ruled out ‘real’ neurological conditions. Neurologists can observe positive signs, or patterns of sensation and movement, that indicate functional symptoms, such as a Hoover’s sign for functional weakness (1). Therefore, although the cause of symptoms remains unknown, FND is a meaningful diagnosis. The very label itself represents progression away from the harmful beliefs that defined this condition in earlier centuries. Sometimes I joke about how I might have been treated if I was living in the past. Would people try to exorcise me, or burn me at the stake? Or would I perhaps be sent away to a charming seaside retreat? A mental asylum may have been more likely. Indeed, symptoms of FND once would have awarded me a diagnosis of ‘hysteria’. This label originates from ancient beliefs about the uterus punishing the female body with illness if left infertile, representing an ideological burden forced on suffering women for centuries (4). In the words of Eliot Slater in 1965, the term was “a disguise for ignorance and a fertile source of clinical error” (5). As theories of psychology and neurology were reworked, clinicians began using the term ‘Conversion Disorder’ (4). FND symptoms were misunderstood as manifestations of psychological trauma being ‘converted’ into physical distress (4). It’s an interesting idea, but an inaccurate one. Many people with FND have not experienced significant trauma prior to developing symptoms (5). It is now understood that mental and physical harm, such as a severe illness or injury, may increase the risk of an individual developing FND (1,7). However, this is not a requirement, and certainly not the cause of this condition. Unfortunately, the medical field has not unanimously moved on from the misunderstandings of the past. Since my episodes of collapse, unresponsiveness, and uncontrollable movements were not typical of epilepsy, they didn’t seem to concern the first, second, or even third medical professional who saw me. I am glad that my condition is not inherently life-threatening — but declaring that there is nothing wrong with someone is a far cry from reassuring them that their brain isn’t in danger. The attitudes I encountered leant strongly towards the former. Doctors seemed eager to attribute my symptoms to ‘stress’, and prove that I could directly control what was happening to me, while some even tried to convince my mum that I was faking everything for attention. These experiences are not an anomaly. In fact, being dismissed or disbelieved is an almost characteristic part of having FND (8,9). It often takes years for people to be correctly diagnosed (8), let alone be offered any semblance of support. After a month, I was privileged enough to receive a diagnosis — and compassion — from a neurologist who took me seriously. Despite this, there are lingering impressions from that first month without any understanding or guidance. It urges me to ignore what I know to be true about FND, and about my own body, to entertain the idea that my thoughts are secretly orchestrating everything. I am crazy, or too weak minded to stop choosing thoughts that make me have FND. Don’t ask me how one can subconsciously do something on purpose. I didn’t put this idea in my own head, just like I didn’t put FND in my own head. Nevertheless, these things exist. People with FND are tasked with navigating not only frightening symptoms, but also ignorance, stigma, and shame. Sometimes science doesn’t give us a satisfying answer. Future research can hopefully provide people with FND more concrete answers, including ways of understanding ourselves and possibilities for symptom management and recovery. Health and disability are complex, and we can never fully understand what someone else is going through. When it comes to FND, I barely understand my own body half of the time. Fortunately, I now understand that I deserve to be treated with respect. Compassion doesn’t need to be confusing. It shouldn’t take a breakthrough in neuroscience for people with FND to be listened to and cared for. References 1. Bennett K, Diamond C, Hoeritzauer I, et al. A practical review of functional neurological disorder (FND) for the general physician. Clinical Medicine . 2021;21(1):28-36. doi: 10.7861/clinmed.2020-0987 2. FND Hope. Symptoms. 2012. Accessed May 11, 2025. https://fndhope.org/fnd-guide/symptoms/ 3. Stone J, Carson A, Duncan R, et al. Who is referred to neurology clinics?--the diagnoses made in 3781 new patients. Clinical Neurology Neurosurgery . 2010;112(9):747-51. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2010.05.011 4. Raynor G, Baslet G. A historical review of functional neurological disorder and comparison to contemporary models. Epilepsy & behavior reports . 2021;16:100489. 10.1016/j.ebr.2021.100489 5. Slater E. Diagnosis of “Hysteria”. Br Med J . 1965;1:1395–1399. doi: 10.1136/bmj.1.5447.1395 6. Ludwig L, Pasman JA, Nicholson T, et al. Stressful life events and maltreatment in conversion (functional neurological) disorder: systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control studies. Lancet Psychiatry . 2018;5(4):307-320. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(18)30051-8 7. Espay AJ, Aybek S, Carson A, et al. Current Concepts in Diagnosis and Treatment of Functional Neurological Disorders. JAMA neurology , 2020;75(9):1132–1141. Doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2018.1264 8. Robson C, Lian OS. “Blaming, shaming, humiliation": Stigmatising medical interactions among people with non-epileptic seizures. Wellcome Open Research , 2017:2, 55. Doi: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.12133.2 9. FND Australia Support Services Inc. Experiences of Functional Neurological Disorder - Summary Report. Canberra (AU): Australian Government National Mental Health Commision; 2019. 13p. Previous article Next article Enigma back to

Issues Check out previous issues of OmniSci Magazine! Issue 7: Apex Cover: Ingrid Sefton 22 October, 2024 READ NOW Issue 6: Elemental Cover: Louise Cen 28 May, 2024 READ NOW Issue 5: Wicked Cover: Aisyah Mohammad Sulhanuddin 24 Oct, 2023 READ NOW ISSUE 4: MIRAGE Cover: Gemma van der Hurk 1 July, 2023 READ NOW ISSUE 3: ALIEN Cover: Ravon Chew September 10, 2022 READ NOW SUMMER ISSUE 2022: A Year In Science Cover: Quynh Anh Nguyen March 23, 2023 READ NOW ISSUE 2: DISORDER Cover: Janna Dingle December 10, 2021 READ NOW ISSUE 1: Science is Everywhere Cover: Cheryl Seah December 24, 2021 READ NOW

< Back to Issue 2 Tactile communication: how touch conveys the things we can’t say Our daily dose of touch has decreased through months of lockdowns. But why is touch so important to us, and why do we feel the lack of it so severely? by Lily McCann 10 December 2021 Edited by Juulke Castelijn and Ethan Newnham Illustrated by Janna Dingle In a confusing world, thrust in and out of lockdowns, estranged from family and friends, you may have felt somewhat lost and out of touch in recent years. What helps to bring you back to a sense of self and belonging? For me it's a hug from my partner, a pat on the back from a sibling or a cuddle with my dog. Positive physical contact helps ground us and reassure us of our place in the world. It's an instinct cultivated from our first moments of life and one crucial to development. As the first sense to form, touch is the start of our gradual awakening into the world and informs our developmental progress. Even touching a mother’s stomach in pregnancy can alter the behaviour of the foetus within[1]. In the mid-late 20th century, researchers began to study the impact of sensory deprivation on children and infants, examining those placed in institutions who suffered from neglect[2]. This was a poignant problem following World War II, when millions of children were orphaned or displaced. The limited number of carers in overcrowded orphanages that attempted to harbour them meant that infants and young children were often left to lie day after day without a hug, stroke or any other form of caring contact. Upon studying these children, it became clear that the impact of deprivation was devastating, resulting in a number of cognitive, behavioural and physical deficits. Studies have since established that increasing tactile contact with developing children is protective against such problems[3]. For instance, simply stroking isolated premature babies improves mental development and physical growth[4]. It seems that touch provides a message to the infant’s body, communicating that it is safe and guarded and in an environment where it can grow and flourish. As you might expect, this process is closely related to stress responses. Studies have shown that in stressful situations of food deprivation, mice populations prioritise survival, neglecting breeding and exploration. When food is plentiful, this is reversed. A mother’s touch has a similar effect on human infants, decreasing stress levels and facilitating development and exploration[5]. We see another good example of this in dogs. Along with other domesticated animals, dog display something called ‘Domestication Syndrome’, which describes a set of features animals shaped by human breeding efforts share[6]. The ‘cute’ physique of such animals (floppy ears, snubby nose, curly tails) are correlated with increased stress tolerance and more tame behaviours. Interestingly, in dogs this decrease in stress is also paired with increased desire for and pleasure in touch. This is clear even between dog breeds: the working Australian Kelpie with its active herding instincts is more likely to chase down a bicycle than snuggle into you and ignore it like the floppy-eared Cavalier. Correlation studies abound, but what about the mechanism behind all these associations? How does touch affect our body? How is its message conveyed? The key mediators of tactile communication are nerve cells, otherwise known as neurons. These cells conduct signals to, from and within our brain. They’re particularly important for sensation, transferring information about our external environment to our inner mind. For touch, there are neurons in our skin with specialised endings that can sense pressure, vibration, temperature and stretch. They respond to these stimuli by firing little signals that tell our brain we’re touching something. There are actually two distinct types of touch that we use. Typing, turning book pages or handling tools are all mediated by the first type, discriminative touch, which is mainly limited to the palmar surface of our hands and fingers. Have a look at your palm now, then flip it over and examine the back of your hand. Notice anything different? The main difference is that the inner surface of your hand is smooth. Check out the back of it – it’s hairy. Hairy skin is differentiated by – you guessed it – hair, but also by the method of touch sensation. The type of touch experienced by hairy skin is affective touch. Affective touch holds the key to explaining our emotional dependence on tactile communication because it describes touch that has emotional and social relevance. It relies on a type of sensory nerve called CT fibres, which are specialised for positive social touch: they respond best to the temperature of human skin and a gentle, stroking pressure. Parents automatically use this sort of touch when interacting with their children[7]. This caring touch is incredibly powerful. It can cause the release of oxytocin (the “bonding hormone”)[8], decrease stress levels[9], and trigger the facial muscles that form a smile[10]. It can stimulate unique emotional responses, such as excitement, affection or calm. It even has the power to speak to DNA itself: research has shown that changing touch exposure in mice affects how DNA is structured and expressed[11]. Social touch is an essential component of how we define ourselves as humans. Without it, touch would mean nothing more than that a person is present, that their skin is warm or cold, dry or wet. The warmth of our partner’s hand wouldn’t create a sense of belonging, hugging a friend wouldn’t trigger memories of time spent together, stroking your child wouldn’t give rise to feelings of love. Affective touch colours our world and gives it meaning. Whilst some suggest that social touch encompasses all intentional, consensual interpersonal touch, I would argue that even accidental touch has a social impact[12]. In recent times we have all felt the change of walking down empty streets. Where bumping or brushing against another person was taken for granted as simply unavoidable on the morning train a couple of years ago, COVID19 has introduced new connotations to such accidental touch, all but prohibiting it. Whilst you may have been frustrated by clustered train carriages, you can’t help but notice that it feels a little lonely when the train is quiet, and the nearest passenger is more than 1.5m away. Even accidental touch signals to the body that you are part of a community, part of a herd, and for a social animal that must be comforting. Look at sheep, for instance: under stress, harassed by sheepdogs or farmers, they automatically cluster together in a group. Whilst an individual bump between two sheep in the herd may be fortuitous, the fact that crowding together maximises interpersonal contact is no accident. The comfort of touch is a fact of human life, but one not often actively acknowledged. Lockdowns and isolation have reminded us all how necessary social contact can be for our wellbeing. Touch is a part of the chatter that defines our place amongst others and our identities as part of a community. So if your pet, friend or partner are in need of comfort, administer a bit of affective touch and see the miraculous calming effects of the actions of those CT nerve cells. Stay safe and sanitise, but remember, hugs are helpful too! References [1]Marx, Viola, and Emese Nagy. 2017. "Fetal Behavioral Responses To The Touch Of The Mother’S Abdomen: A Frame-By-Frame Analysis". Infant Behavior And Development 47: 83-91. doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2017.03.005. [2] van der Horst, Frank C. P., and René van der Veer. 2008. "Loneliness In Infancy: Harry Harlow, John Bowlby And Issues Of Separation". Integrative Psychological And Behavioral Science 42 (4): 325-335. doi:10.1007/s12124-008-9071-x. [3] Ardiel, Evan L, and Catharine H Rankin. 2010. "The Importance Of Touch In Development". Paediatrics & Child Health 15 (3): 153-156. doi:10.1093/pch/15.3.153. [4] Rice, Ruth D. 1977. "Neurophysiological Development In Premature Infants Following Stimulation.". Developmental Psychology 13 (1): 69-76. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.13.1.69. [5] Caldji, Christian, Josie Diorio, and Michael J Meaney. 2000. "Variations In Maternal Care In Infancy Regulate The Development Of Stress Reactivity". Biological Psychiatry 48 (12): 1164-1174. doi:10.1016/s0006-3223(00)01084-2. [6] Trut, Lyudmila. 1999. "Early Canid Domestication: The Farm-Fox Experiment". American Scientist 87 (2): 160. doi:10.1511/1999.2.160. [7]Croy, Ilona, Edda Drechsler, Paul Hamilton, Thomas Hummel, and Håkan Olausson. 2016. "Olfactory Modulation Of Affective Touch Processing — A Neurophysiological Investigation". Neuroimage 135: 135-141. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.04.046.v [8]Walker, Susannah C., Paula D. Trotter, William T. Swaney, Andrew Marshall, and Francis P. Mcglone. 2017. "C-Tactile Afferents: Cutaneous Mediators Of Oxytocin Release During Affiliative Tactile Interactions?". Neuropeptides 64: 27-38. doi:10.1016/j.npep.2017.01.001. [9]Field, Tiffany. 2010. "Touch For Socioemotional And Physical Well-Being: A Review". Developmental Review 30 (4): 367-383. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2011.01.001. [10]Pawling, Ralph, Peter R. Cannon, Francis P. McGlone, and Susannah C. Walker. 2017. "C-Tactile Afferent Stimulating Touch Carries A Positive Affective Value". PLOS ONE 12 (3): e0173457. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0173457. [11]Bagot, R. C., T.-Y. Zhang, X. Wen, T. T. T. Nguyen, H.-B. Nguyen, J. Diorio, T. P. Wong, and M. J. Meaney. 2012. "Variations In Postnatal Maternal Care And The Epigenetic Regulation Of Metabotropic Glutamate Receptor 1 Expression And Hippocampal Function In The Rat". Proceedings Of The National Academy Of Sciences 109 (Supplement_2): 17200-17207. doi:10.1073/pnas.1204599109. [12] Cascio, Carissa J., David Moore, and Francis McGlone. 2019. "Social Touch And Human Development". Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience 35: 5-11. doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2018.04.009. Previous article back to DISORDER Next article

By Gaurika Loomba < Back to Issue 3 Mighty Microscopic Warriors! By Gaurika Loomba 10 September 2022 Edited by Niesha Baker and Khoa-Anh Tran Illustrated by Rachel Ko Next It’s a fine Saturday afternoon. You’re sitting in your backyard sipping on coffee and losing your mind over the daily Wordle. While you’re so engrossed, an unusual, blue-colored creature pulls another chair and solves the Wordle for you. Just as you look up and try to process the condescending smirk of this creature, your daily news notification pops up. It's true! The whole world has been invaded by aliens! Thankfully this is a figment of our imagination, but would you believe me if I told you that alien invasions are constantly happening unnoticed in the microscopic world of our bodies? Every day, our cells face new ‘alien invasions’, thanks to unhygienic eating, or even just from breathing! In the external world, such an invasion would unsettle the entire human population and adversely impact the lives of everyone. It’s amazing how such invasions inside our bodies are usually defeated daily. So who are these tiny ‘soldiers’ that fight them off, silently and efficiently? It’s time to introduce the two brothers of our story– the innate immune cells system and the adaptive immune cells system, the former being the more enthusiastic and energetic one, while the latter is calmer and wiser. Although different in nature, the two systems coordinate efficiently to eliminate our enemies and help us go on about our lives. The innate immune system acts first when a pathogen (a disease-causing microorganism) manages to enter our bodies by getting around our physical barriers like the skin, and the mucus in the respiratory, gastric, urinary, and sexual tracts, etc. The innate immune system consists of cells like macrophages and dendritic cells (DCs), which are constantly looking out for incoming invaders. These cells recognise pathogens through common foreign attributes that our native cells don’t possess. In order to defend us from the harmful effects of the pathogen, our innate cells engulf them. In fact, the word ‘macrophages’ literally means ‘big eaters.’ Inside our cells, the pathogens’ end is inevitable, smashed and broken into pieces, which are mounted on our soldier cells’ surfaces, informing other soldier cells that an invasion has occurred. Exposing broken parts of the pathogen on our innate cells’ surfaces also produces chemicals called cytokines that help recruit more of our soldier cells to the site of invasion. So, when we get flu, the secreted cytokines is why we run a fever, cough, sneeze, and influx of our soldier cells to the throat area is why we may have swelling around there. Similarly, if we bruise, our blood vessels dilate to allow entry of our soldier cells to the wounded area, which is then manifested as redness and swelling around it. Fortunately, this means of communication of our soldier cells is much faster than our internet connection and so the whole process occurs in a matter of hours. On most days, the keen innate immune system is enough to control an invasion. However, it needs big brotherly advice from the adaptive immune system in case things get out of hand. The main players of this part of the immune system are the calm B- and T-cells. These can be found resting in the lymph nodes, unaware of the invasion in the body. The B- and T-cells are wise soldiers, which is evident in the way they respond to an invasion. Each of these cells has molecules called ‘receptors’, which uniquely recognise pathogen parts presented to them. These receptors, on an adaptive cell, can be thought of as padlocks and the broken pathogen parts, mounted on an innate cell, as a key. In the lymph nodes, each resting B- and T-cell has a different type of padlock, unique for a different key. It is the job of a DC, with a broken pathogen part mounted on its surface, to enter the lymph nodes and search for the most accurate match for its key, from the variety of B- and T-cell padlocks. The key varies based on the different types of pathogens that invade our bodies. Once the perfect match is found, that specific B- and T-cell is activated and rapidly multiplied. This lock-and-key method of activation of adaptive cells confers the specificity of their action. These activated cells move from the lymph nodes to the site of infection and perform different functions that halt the pathogen from spreading the disease, by either killing the pathogen or stopping its reproduction. At the site of infection, innate cells, with the key (broken pathogen part) mounted on their surface wait for the brotherly advice, the incoming adaptive cells with the perfect match to the key. The activated T-cells uniquely interact with macrophages and signal them to start killing the pathogens that they have engulfed. This helps with clearance of the pathogen. Although B-cells are part of the adaptive immune system, they can also recognise the foreign pathogen products, break them down, and present these parts on their surface, just like the innate immune cells. So now B-cells also have a key to the activated T-cell padlocks. Their lock-and-key interaction facilitates the B-cells to release antibodies. Finally, the antibodies, together with the macrophages and DCs, as well as the B- and T-cells of the adaptive immune system, successfully win the war and die peacefully, having completed their purpose. But a small portion of B- and T-cells go on and develop into long-lived memory cells. Over the span of our lives, we are infected and reinfected with pathogens all the time, however not every encounter results in us falling sick. The credit goes to the B- and T-memory cells and their ability to remember the foreign attributes of the pathogen and kill it as soon as it re-invades. Adaptive cells’ memory is the principle of vaccination. An inactive pathogen or a part of the pathogen is introduced into the body. This trains our soldier cells for a real pathogen invasion by triggering the B-cells to form memory and specialised antibodies against the pseudo-pathogen. If the real pathogen infects us again, these pre-formed antibodies make fighting the war much easier and quicker. Correct training of immune cells is essential since a pathogen invasion is a life-or-death situation for us. Any mistakes by our soldier cells can have devastating effects. For example, an important part of the training process is to ensure the immune cells aptly distinguish between civilian cells and foreign cells. This education occurs in the bone marrow. Here, any B- or T-cells that attack civilian cells or cell parts are evicted from the training process so only the most eligible soldier cells continue to become eligible soldiers. (1) But even after a rigorous selection process, things can go wrong with our immune system. Instead of being our defending heroes, they turn their back against us and start identifying civilian cells as aliens and attacking them. Sadly, this is the reality for 5% of the Australian population, with a majority being women. This condition, when the immune cells stop distinguishing internal cells from alien cells, is called an auto-immune disorder. The cause for this disorder is mostly unknown, with some speculations of it being genetic or environmental. The repercussions can be mild, such as causing dry mouth and dry eyes - symptoms for Sjogren’s syndrome, or more severe such as joint pain and immobilisation, known as Rheumatoid Arthritis. These diseases are currently life-long and incurable because they involve our own cells fighting the healthy cells in our body. (2) Nevertheless, the immune system plays a very important role in helping us lead normal lives. It fights the battle against the invaders daily, without us realizing it. Thanks to the soldiers of the immune system, our daily activities, like solving a Wordle on a relaxing Saturday, are not hindered by an alien cell invasion in our bodies! References Kenneth Murphy, Casey Weaver. Basic concepts in Immunology. Janeway’s Immunobiology. 9th ed. United States: Garland Science Taylor and Francis; 2017. p. 4-11 Overview of autoimmune diseases [Internet]. Healthdirect. Available from: Overview of autoimmune diseases | healthdirect Previous article Next article alien back to

< Back to Issue 2 Building the Lightsaber Some of the most iconic movie gadgets are the oldest ones. For this issue we look at how the lightsaber was brought to life. by Manthila Ranatunga 10 December 2021 Edited by Sam Williams and Tanya Kovacevic Illustrated by Rohith S Prabhu Star Wars : A New Hope was a massive success when it hit cinemas back in 1977. It was a groundbreaking sensation in the field of science fiction movies and computer generated imagery (CGI) in films. What really caught many fans’ eyes was, of course, the lightsaber. Also referred to as a “laser sword”, it is described as “an elegant weapon, for a more civilised age”. Now in our civilised age, we have decided to replicate this dangerous weapon. Lightsabers have already been built by a few enthusiasts. For this piece, we will be focusing on Hacksmith Industries’ lightsaber build from 2020 , as it is the closest to the real deal. Fig. 1. “Hacksmith Industries’ latest lightsaber build”, Hacksmith Industries, 4000° PLASMA PROTO-LIGHTSABER BUILD, 2020. Hacksmith Industries was founded by James Hobson, an engineer who builds real-life versions of film and video game gadgets. After multiple attempts, the team managed to fabricate a retractable, plasma-based lightsaber. However, this is not a real lightsaber, but more-so a protosaber in the Star Wars universe. We will get back to this point later on. How do they work? Let us first talk about how lightsabers work in the movies. A lightsaber consists of three parts: the hilt, the Kyber crystal and the blade itself. Similar to a traditional sword, the hilt is the handle and is made of a durable metal such as aluminium. It contains the Kyber crystal, which is a rare crystal found in the Star Wars universe and is the power source of the lightsaber. Moving onto the more interesting part, the blade is a beam of plasma. Often called “the fourth state of matter”, it is created by heating gas up to temperatures as high as 2,500 degrees celsius. A battery inside the hilt activates the crystal. The produced plasma is then focused through a lens and directed outwards. An electromagnetic field, essentially a force field, generated at the hilt contains the plasma in a defined beam and directs it back into the hilt. The crystal absorbs the energy and recycles it. Hence lightsabers are extremely energy-efficient, allowing Jedi Knights to use them for their whole lifetimes. Fig. 2. Robert W. Schönholz, Blue Lightsaber, c.2016. Of course, the lightsaber breaks the laws of physics. Electromagnetic fields do not work as they do on fictional planets like Coruscant. Energy-dense power sources such as Kyber crystals do not exist in real life, which leads us to the protosaber. In Star Wars lore, a protosaber is a lightsaber with an external power source. It was the predecessor to the lightsaber when Kyber crystals could not be contained inside the hilt. Since real-life high energy sources cannot be squished into the hilt, Hacksmith Industries' lightsaber build is reminiscent of the early protosaber. The build The engineers at Hacksmith Industries settled on liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) as the power source, the same gas used for home heating systems and barbecues. This gas is fed through the brass and copper hilt, and is burnt continuously to keep producing plasma. To form the beam shape of the blade, they incorporated laminar flow of gas. Ever seen videos of “frozen” water coming out of taps like this ? Laminar flow occurs when layers of fluid molecules, in this case LPG, flow without mixing. In this instance, a smooth beam is created. Unlike actual lightsabers, the beam does not return to the hilt to be absorbed. Of course, to be a lightsaber, it has to function like one, too. The plasma is extremely hot, reaching up to 2,200 degrees celsius. Therefore, it can cut through metal and other objects much like we see in the movies. This also means contact with the blade can lead to serious or even fatal injuries. The external power supply is in the form of a backpack, with mounted LPG canisters and electronics for assistance. Overall, the build looks, feels and works like a real lightsaber, which makes it a pretty accurate replica. However, we do not have the Force or ancient Jedi wisdom, so there are some notable imperfections in the design. Fig. 3. “Finished lightsaber build”, Hacksmith Industries, 4000° PLASMA PROTO-LIGHTSABER BUILD, 2020. Colours Lightsabers come in a variety of colours, each reflecting the wielder's moral values in Star Wars canon. Blue, for example, represents justice and protection. Green, blue and red are the most commonly seen in the movies, but lightsabers also come in purple, orange, yellow, white and black. If you did high school science, you may remember mixing bunsen burner flames with salts to produce colours. The same principle applies here; salts can be mixed in with plasma to colour the blade. For example, Strontium Chloride gives a red colour, so you can finally live out your Sith fantasies. Fig. 4. “Lightsaber colours by mixing salts”, Hacksmith Industries, 4000° PLASMA PROTO-LIGHTSABER BUILD, 2020. Improvements The downside of using plasma is that we cannot fight with it. Blades would pass right through each other without clashing. To fix this, a metal rod that can withstand high temperatures, such as Tungsten, could form the blade with a beam of plasma around it. However, this means the lightsaber would not be retractable, which defeats the purpose. To keep the blade coloured, salts have to be continuously fed through the hilt. This can be done with another pressurised canister along with the LPG, although it requires extra space. Despite the imperfections, the protosaber by Hacksmith Industries is the closest prototype to a real-life lightsaber. With constantly evolving technology, we will be able to build a more compact model that more closely resembles those in the movies. Makers all around the world are building cool movie gadgets like the lightsaber, so keep a lookout for your favourite ones. You never know what the nerds may bring! References 1. Amy Tikkanen, “Star Wars”, Britannica, published April 10, 2008, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Star-Wars-film-series. 2, 4, 7. Hacksmith Industries, “4000° PLASMA PROTO-LIGHTSABER BUILD (RETRACTABLE BLADE!)”, October 2020, YouTube video, 18:15, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xC6J4T_hUKg. 3. Joshua Sostrin, “Keeping it real with the Hacksmith”, YouTube Official Blog (blog), November 12, 2020, https://blog.youtube/creator-and-artist-stories/the-hacksmith-10-million-subscribers/. 5. Daniel Kolitz, “Are Lightsabers Theoretically Possible?”, Gizmodo, published August 10, 2021, https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2021/08/are-lightsabers-theoretically-possible/. 6. Richard Rogers, “Lightsaber Battery Analysis”, Arbin Instruments: News, published October 3, 2019, https://www.arbin.com/lightsaber-battery-analysis/. 8. Phil Edwards, “Star Wars lightsaber colors, explained”, Vox, published May 4, 2015, https://www.vox.com/2015/5/31/8689811/lightsaber-colors-star-wars. Previous article back to DISORDER Next article