Latest news with #science
Free Malaysia Today
10 hours ago
- Science
- Free Malaysia Today
From nature tables to UK's Royal Society: Ravigadevi's love for science
Ravigadevi Sambanthamurthi will be officially inducted into UK's Royal Society as a Fellow on July 11. (Muhammad Rabbani Jamian @ FMT Lifestyle) PETALING JAYA : Turning 70 years old is an incredible milestone, but for Turning 70 years old is an incredible milestone, but for Ravigadevi Sambanthamurthi , the occasion will be extra special. On July 11, two days before she celebrates her birthday, Ravigadevi will be officially inducted into UK's Royal Society as a Fellow, making history as the first Malaysian to receive the honour. As part of the ceremony, Ravigadevi, a scientific consultant with the Malaysian Palm Oil Board (MPOB), will sign the centuries-old Royal Society's Charter Book, which bears the signatures of scientific greats such as Charles Darwin, known for his theory of evolution. In a recent interview, FMT Lifestyle learnt more about the woman behind this remarkable achievement. Her love for science was sparked in part by a 'nature table' at her primary school, Convent Bukit Nanas. She said students were encouraged to bring items found in nature, display them, and explain them to their classmates. 'Everyone learns from it. And it was such a fun way of learning,' she recalled. Her passion for science deepened in secondary school where she developed a love for chemistry, an interest that would later shape her future career. To this today, Ravigadevi remembers the dedication of her teachers, especially her late chemistry teacher, Mrs Maniam. 'She played a key role in my love for chemistry. She really knew how to nurture a love for the subject. That's why I say teachers play such an important role in getting kids to appreciate a subject.' Ravigadevi has received numerous accolades throughout her career – and has even met theoretical physicist, cosmologist, and author Stephen Hawking. (Muhammad Rabbani Jamian @ FMT Lifestyle) At home, education was a priority for her parents. 'They never pushed us, but they also told us, 'It's up to you what you want to do. We won't tell you to be a lawyer or a doctor – you decide. But what you do, you must do the best,' she said. And that's exactly what she did. Throughout her career, Ravigadevi led transformative research in oil palm biochemistry and genomics, recognising its importance to Malaysia's economy. She became the founding director of the advanced biotechnology and breeding centre at MPOB, and led the oil palm genome project, successfully deciphering the genetic blueprint of the crop. She also helmed the team that identified the Shell gene, a key determinant of oil yields, uncovering the epigenetic cause of an abnormality that could potentially reduce yields significantly. These breakthroughs were published in the science journal, 'Nature'. She has received numerous accolades including the 'Knight of the International Order of Merit of Inventors' by the International Federation of Inventors Association'; the 'Tan Sri Augustine Ong Lifetime Achievement Award for Inventions and Innovations in Oil Palm'; and the 'Intel Environment Laureate' distinction from the Tech Museum, US. Ravigadevi credits her research team at MPOB for helping conduct breakthrough oil palm research. (Ravigadevi Sambanthamurthi pic) She is also immensely grateful to her research team at MPOB as well as those from Orion Genomics USA and Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory who she worked with. 'We can be the best if we want to. We just need the right ecosystem to thrive. And I was just so blessed that I had the right ecosystem, both in terms of infrastructure and support from my bosses and team. 'In order to be a good leader, you must also be a good team player. You cannot be one and not the other,' she said. Teamwork was also instrumental in helping her balance the demands of career and family – this time, with her husband, whom she described as 'very, very supportive'. Ravigadevi also made it a point to introduce her three children to her work, sparking their curiosity from young. Today, they are carving their own paths in economics, biotechnology and law, having studied in Harvard and MIT. Ravigadevi with her husband, Dr Subramaniam Krishnan and son, Abhilaash Subramaniam. (Muhammad Rabbani Jamian @ FMT Lifestyle) Just like her parents, she has valued education, actively participating in the parent-teacher associations of her children's schools, focusing on the education portfolio. She has also given free tuition, including to students from low-income families. To younger women scientists in Malaysia, she shared: 'Dare to dream big. Dare to fail. Dream – that's very, very important. Please don't ever stop that. Don't ever think you can't do it. Don't let anybody else define your limits. 'But at the same time, be grounded in good science. You have to get your basics right. And go do it. You can do it. We need you. We need more women in science.' Learn more about Ravigadevi Sambanthamurthi here.
ABC News
16 hours ago
- Health
- ABC News
Can 'biological clock' tests tell you anything worthwhile?
We all like to imagine we're ageing well. Now a simple blood or saliva test promises to tell us by measuring our "biological age". And then, as many have done, we can share how "young" we really are on social media, along with our secrets to success. While chronological age is how long you have been alive, measures of biological age aim to indicate how old your body actually is, purporting to measure "wear and tear" at a molecular level. The appeal of these tests is undeniable. Health-conscious consumers may see their results as reinforcing their anti-ageing efforts, or a way to show their journey to better health is paying off. But how good are these tests? Do they actually offer useful insights? Or are they just clever marketing dressed up to look like science? Over time, the chemical processes that allow our body to function, known as our "metabolic activity", lead to damage and a decline in the activity of our cells, tissues and organs. Biological age tests aim to capture some of these changes, offering a snapshot of how well, or how poorly, we are ageing on a cellular level. Our DNA is also affected by the ageing process. In particular, chemical tags (methyl groups) attach to our DNA and affect gene expression. These changes occur in predictable ways with age and environmental exposures, in a process called methylation. Research studies have used "epigenetic clocks", which measure the methylation of our genes, to estimate biological age. By analysing methylation levels at specific sites in the genome from participant samples, researchers apply predictive models to estimate the cumulative wear and tear on the body. Although the science is rapidly evolving, the evidence underpinning the use of epigenetic clocks to measure biological ageing in research studies is strong. Studies have shown epigenetic biological age estimation is a better predictor of the risk of death and ageing-related diseases than chronological age. Epigenetic clocks also have been found to correlate strongly with lifestyle and environmental exposures, such as smoking status and diet quality. In addition, they have been found to be able to predict the risk of conditions such as cardiovascular disease, which can lead to heart attacks and strokes. Taken together, a growing body of research indicates that at a population level, epigenetic clocks are robust measures of biological ageing and are strongly linked to the risk of disease and death. While these tests are valuable when studying populations in research settings, using epigenetic clocks to measure the biological age of individuals is a different matter and requires scrutiny. For testing at an individual level, perhaps the most important consideration is the "signal to noise ratio" (or precision) of these tests. This is the question of whether a single sample from an individual may yield widely differing results. A study from 2022 found samples deviated by up to nine years. So an identical sample from a 40-year-old may indicate a biological age of as low as 35 years (a cause for celebration) or as high as 44 years (a cause of anxiety). While there have been significant improvements in these tests over the years, there is considerable variability in the precision of these tests between commercial providers. So depending on who you send your sample to, your estimated biological age may vary considerably. Another limitation is there is currently no standardisation of methods for this testing. Commercial providers perform these tests in different ways and have different algorithms for estimating biological age from the data. As you would expect for commercial operators, providers don't disclose their methods. So it's difficult to compare companies and determine who provides the most accurate results — and what you're getting for your money. A third limitation is that while epigenetic clocks correlate well with ageing, they are simply a "proxy" and are not a diagnostic tool. In other words, they may provide a general indication of ageing at a cellular level. But they don't offer any specific insights about what the issue may be if someone is found to be "ageing faster" than they would like, or what they're doing right if they are "ageing well". So regardless of the result of your test, all you're likely to get from the commercial provider of an epigenetic test is generic advice about what the science says is healthy behaviour. While companies offering these tests may have good intentions, remember their ultimate goal is to sell you these tests and make a profit. And at a cost of around $500, they're not cheap. While the idea of using these tests as a personalised health tool has potential, it is clear that we are not there yet. For this to become a reality, tests will need to become more reproducible, standardised across providers, and validated through long-term studies that link changes in biological age to specific behaviours. So while one-off tests of biological age make for impressive social media posts, for most people they represent a significant cost and offer limited real value. The good news is we already know what we need to do to increase our chances of living longer and healthier lives. These include: We don't need to know our biological age in order to implement changes in our lives right now to improve our health. Hassan Vally is an associate professor of epidemiology at Deakin University. This piece first appeared on The Conversation.
CBS News
17 hours ago
- Science
- CBS News
Perot Museum in Dallas opens "Bug Lab," a larger-than-life insect exhibit with hands-on activities
The Perot Museum of Nature and Science is opening The Bug Lab, an exhibition organizers say will transform you into the size of a bug with larger-than-life models and interactive learning stations. Opening on June 28, the museum said the exhibit invites visitors to discover how bugs adaptation inspires cutting-edge human innovation and see how humans are applying "bug genius" to solve problems. "Precision flight, swarm intelligence, even brain surgery – insects offer us a template for technology and innovation," said Linda Silver, chief executive officer of the Perot Museum. The museum said the exhibit i meant for all ages. It includes: Immersive Bug Chambers that recreate detailed environments, allowing visitors to experience firsthand the remarkable abilities of various insects, from the lightning speed of dragonflies to the lightning-fast reflexes of mantises. Interactive Adaptation Stations where visitors can test their skills against those bugs through engaging, hands-on activities that demonstrate the complexity of insect behavior and capabilities. Hands-On Labs where visitors can examine actual bug specimens and learn cutting-edge bug science and bio-inspiration through hands-on interaction. "With a blend of science, wonder, and interactive learning that aligns with the Perot Museum's mission to inspire minds through nature and science, 'Bug Lab' will change how people perceive these tiny creatures by showcasing their remarkable adaptations and what humans can learn from them," Silver said. Admission tickets can be purchased in addition to general admission. Adult tickets are $10 Youth tickets (ages 2-12) are $8 Can't make it this summer? Do not worry, the exhibit will be open through the year and closing on Jan. 6, 2026.
The Guardian
21 hours ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
Public trust in science has been eroded, from Covid-19 to climate
Jane Qiu rightly identifies that public trust in science has diminished in recent times (The Covid 'lab leak' theory isn't just a rightwing conspiracy – pretending that's the case is bad for science, 25 June), but she misses some root causes. Scientists and the media often don't differentiate or clearly distinguish between hypotheses, initial findings and accepted scientific understanding when publishing information, leaving the reader/listener confused. The media get viewers, readers or clicks (money); the scientist potentially gets interest that leads to longer tenure or funding. The public gets confused when a report is later refuted or overturned. Universities and the scientists employed by them used to be largely government-funded and independent of industry and politics. Now they are competing for government and private funds and are willing to muddy the waters around hypotheses, preliminary findings and peer-reviews. By doing so they are playing into the hands of anti-science groups. Scientists are now as market-oriented as any other professionals, and it isn't doing society any good. Why believe climate science when the boffins can't even agree on how Covid-19 arose?Steven LeeFaulconbridge, New South Wales, Australia Jane Qiu makes a lot of excellent points. But it is not fair to imply that blame for mistrust in science lies with scientists themselves. It lies with the populist right, and decades of sustained and largely baseless attacks on scientific integrity. Climate denial, anti-vaxxing and lockdown scepticism are three major examples. As well as manufacturing doubt, these bad actors remove any nuance from public debate – reducing complex issues to a binary shouting match. Meanwhile, climate denial has taught us that even statements in private emails can be ripped out of context and splashed across the global media, to promote a false narrative. In such an environment, any communication with the public on contentious issues is a minefield, and it is hardly surprising that many conscientious scientists avoid it. Scientists need to communicate openly and honestly with the public, but we need support from the media, challenging anti-science voices instead of platforming them. Only then can we achieve the sort of thoughtful and honest discussion of scientific evidence that the public deserves. Dr Richard MilneEdinburgh Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
Washington Post
a day ago
- Health
- Washington Post
RFK Jr.'s made promises about vaccines. Here's what he's done as health secretary
During his Senate confirmation hearings, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. suggested he wouldn't undermine vaccines. 'I am not going to go into HHS and impose my preordained opinions on anybody at HHS,' he said. 'I'm going to empower the scientists at HHS to do their job and make sure that we have good science that is evidence based.'
