The deadliest things are not, what we suspect that they are

AC-47 "Spooky"
Picture I

http://crisisofdemocracticstates.blogspot.com/p/the-deadliest-things-are-not-what-we.html

Kimmo  Huosionmaa

Normally people think that some nuclear weapons and STEALTH-fighters are dangerous for people but in the real life we would die for many other reasons, like walking ahead of the car, But reality is, that even more often we would die because we eat too much sugar and fat. When we are going to visit in another land, we would afraid many things like a violation, and of course, mother warned us about sex with local girls. But then we would go to sit in the same room with another tourist, who has been sitting on the bus with the person, who had the flu.


We would not have sexual contact with this person, and everything seems that this person just got cold. This flu might be very first symptoms of the worlds deadliest virus, known as Ebola. The problem with that hemorrhage fewer is that causes the first symptoms after a couple of hours and the second is, that the virus would transfer to victims blood in the spit contagion.

Nobody believes this is only the marginal case, but as we know, that the first symptoms of Ebola seem like flu, and that would cause the situation, where some Ebola-patient comes to sit next to another person in the bus. This is the worst scenario, what the CDC has ever created. The another very bad believe is that some new military systems are deadly. Of course, if some head of the state would want to go to legal war, this person would buy the next-generation fighters like JAS-Gripens from some country, and that would be legal weapons trade.

But if the head of the state would want to make genocides, would he think, that those Ebola-viruses are perfect for that operation, but the laboratories would be problematic, because if somebody finds out that the tissue samples of that virus would be transferred to the cell plantages, and then the virus can be produced from the single organism. But if that organism would release in the wrong place, would that cause the death of the head of the state. So this person might want to do this dirty job with some equipment, what is unseen for normal people.

The deadliest aircraft in the world is gunship if the firing operation would be targeted against infantry. By using modified cargo-planes with rapid action machine guns could only a couple of persons kill even thousands of people. In theory, four or eight mercenary soldiers, who operate with two AC-47 gunships can control entire state in Africa. In this case, the unit has two Dakotas, with GAU-2 miniguns, and they operate nonstop. The other crew must, of course, rest while another gunship operates. And there is a pilot and co-pilot, who operates miniguns and the loader, who change the ammo belts for that weapon.


The minigun can operate from the cockpit by installing the electric switch to the control stick of that plane, and the aiming for those weapons could happen by using video-and infrared cameras, what is used for locating the heat leaks in buildings. Those systems can be connected to the screens, what are in the cockpit, and then the system is ready for work, and when we are thinking about Vietnam, there was the jungle, what protected Viet-Cong fighters.


But in Africa, there would be no protection against this weapon. If the opponent has no anti-aircraft missiles like BUK-system, they would be in very big trouble. If those opponents are guerillas, they have realistic chance to buy the Stingers or SA-14 missiles, what can harm that gunship, but there is only one problem. Selling weapons to guerillas is strictly prohibited. And if someone wants to sell those shoulder-shooting missiles for guerillas, that salesman must be quite sure, that the guerrillas would win, and they would not tell that story to the international press.


Of course, that gunship is also illegal, if it has bought during the conflict. But the governments have one head start for guerillas, they diside, when the war can be started, and if some area would be rebellious, can the government buy military equipment, and when the storages are full of weapons, would it tell the rebellion to the world. And if the conflict is not known, it would not have existed. This is the golden rule in international politics.

Sources:

Picture I

https://media.defense.gov/2005/Dec/29/2000570863/-1/-1/0/051128-F-1234P-051.JPG

How some genomes become dominating allele?

Charles V Habsburg
(Picture I)

http://crisisofdemocracticstates.blogspot.fi/p/how-some-genomes-become-dominating.html

Kimmo Huosionmaa


The genomes order our physical shape, and they are responsible for many things like color blindness and many other things are genetically heritable features. But the question is how some gene becomes dominating? The reason for this phenomenon is that there is a group of genomes, what is starting enriching. That situation can happen when some family becomes the power of the nation. In this case, this family would become the very popular group in their own society, and other families would get their spouses from this powerful family. In that case, the family, of course, gets very much children, and then happens something, what people would not actually mention. When a couple of generations would pass away, those grandchildren would become second cousins together.


And in this case is juridically legal that those persons get married. When we are talking about the royal families, the social environment where they lived is not very big, and that caused the re-marriages to that family. The population would become small enough, would it cause that genetic material would start to enriched, and this will cause the heritable symptoms like hemophilia to those persons. And of course some very salient figures in their body starting to forming. The best example of this kind of advantage, what is caused by genetic enrichment is the lower lip of Habsburgs. That caused very big jaw, and in fact, the jaw of some persons of that family has been so big, that they couldn't eat public. But also there are many more marks of the royal and important families like big nose or loss of hair.


That characteristic detail of that family faces is sometimes mentioned the example of lethal allele. Members of that family are very easy to recognize of that detail. And maybe some assassins used that thing to track those people. That investigation is very important to track the heritable syndromes or ability to get some syndrome. Some illnesses that are caused by viruses and bacteria are very dangerous for some people. But there are a people, who live in the areas, what is full of malaria and mosquito. And in those areas, natural selection would cause the mutation, that some people would become immune against malaria or another disease. The reason for resistance to malaria is that some people blood cells look like the sickle.


So the sickle-cell anemia would give immunity to malaria. If we are thinking careful there could be people who are immune against Ebola. In those cases, malaria and Ebola could cause the situation that only the people who are resistant to those diseases can make children. And because the genetic material would enrich, that can cause immunity. That meant the genomes of those people can cause to create the virus, what would transfer that genetic material to the nucleus of the cells. This genome therapy might make all people resistant to those diseases. But this last thing is only fiction. There are many juridical questions to solve before that kind of vaccines gets the permission to deliver in the population. The vaccines and genome therapies need the investigations to be accepted as the medical use of vaccine programs.

Sources:

https://listverse.com/2016/10/06/10-crazy-facts-about-europes-bizarre-habsburg-rulers/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sickle-cell_disease

Picture I

https://listverse.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Charles-V-Habsburg.png

http://crisisofdemocracticstates.blogspot.fi/p/how-some-genomes-become-dominating.html

The silence of war, democracy, and international politics

http://crisisofdemocracticstates.blogspot.fi/p/the-silence-of-war-democracy-and.html

http://crisisofdemocracticstates.blogspot.fi/p/the-silence-of-war-democracy-and.html

Pian maailman pelätyin virus saadaan uusien rokotteiden ansiosta ainakin osittain kuriin, eli ehkä Ebola on tulevaisuudessa historiaa

Ebola-virusta vastaan kehitetty rokote on pian tulossa markkinoille, jos WHO antaa siihen luvan, ja kliinisten testien mukaan tuolla rokotteella on vaikutusta. New York Timesin mukaan tuo rokote on antamassa 100% suojan tuota tautia vastaan, ja ehkä se sitten merkitsee erän maailman pelätyimmista skenaarioista poistumista ihmisten mielestä. Kuitenkin tässä alla olevassa jutussa näkyy sellainen asia, mistä aina välillä keskustellaan esimerkiksi syöpälääkkeiden kehittämisen yhteydessä, ja se on aina pinnalla, kun lääkkeitä aletaan testata ihmisillä. Kaikkein mutkattomin tapa hoitaa tauteja on se, että niitä vastaan kehitetään rokote, mikä estää ihmistä saamasta sitä ollenkaan.

Nämä rokote- tai lääketestit tehdään niin, että otetaan kaksi eliöryhmää, joista toiseen ruiskutetaan testattavaa rokotetta ja toiseen sitten lumerokotetta tai lumelääkettä eli placeboa. Ja varsinkin ihmiskokeiden yhteydessä saattaa tutkijoiden mieleen kohota sellaisia kysymyksiä, kuin miten he sitten valitsevat ne ihmiset, jotka saavat rokotteen tai lääkkeen, ja kuka saa sitten placeboa? Kun valitaan 6000 ihmistä, jotka saavat tuota rokotetta, ja sitten otetaan verrokkiryhmä, joka ei saa rokotetta tulee eteen erittäin vakavia moraalisia kysymyksiä, joista tärkein on se, että mitä tehdään jos rokote tai lääke sitten antaa täyden suojan tuota tautia vastaan tai parantaa sen?

Mitä tehdään niille ihmisille, jotka ovat ilmoittautuneet lääkkeen tai rokotteen koekäyttäjiksi, mutta saaneet sitten placeboa? Rokotteiden kehittämisessä ongelma on siinä, että ihmisen immuunipuolustus pitää aktivoida, mutta virus itse ei saisi siirtää perimäänsä ihmisen soluihin. Tässä Ebolan kaltaisessa äärimmäisen tappavassa taudissa on sellainen aspekti, että jos henkilö saa tuon viruksen, niin silloin hän kuolee. Toisaalta jos rokote ei toimi tai se aiheuttaa myöhemmin tuolle koehenkilölle ongelmia, kuten sen että hän olisi saanut Ebolan, niin mitä silloin olisi pitänyt tehdä? Tuon asian takia ihmiseen ei saisi ruiskuttaa lisääntymiskykyisiä viruksia, vaan tehokkain tapa olisi käyttää pelkkiä virusten proteiinikuoria.

Tai mitä silloin olisi voitu tehdä, jos rokotteessa käytettävä olisi muuttunut tuon ihmisen elimistössä siten, että hän olisi saanut Ebolan, joka ei tartu muihin, mutta surmaa hänet itsensä? Rokotteiden ongelma on siinä, että niissä annetaan ihmisille viruksia, joiden toivotaan sitten saavan aikaan immuunipuolustusreaktion, ja sitä kautta suojan tuota tautia vastaan. Mutta rokotteessa käytettävien elävienvirusten ongelma on siinä, että ne menevät samalla tavoin ihmisen soluihin kuin tautia aiheuttavat virukset tekevät, ja sitten ne jäävät solujen DNA:han.

Tuo ei vaikuta mitenkään vakavalta, mutta voidaan ajatella, että kun solut jakautuvat, niin tuo viruksen geneettinen koodi saattaa mutatoitua, jolloin ihminen voi saada taudin ehkä vuosien kuluttua. Tuon takia ei viruksen DNA saa olla sellaisessa tilassa, että se kykenee aiheuttamaan tauteja. Virus on oikeastaan pelkkä pätkä perimäainesta, ja koska se tarvitsee lisääntyäkseen soluja, joiden perimään se liittää itsensä, ja valjastaa solun valmistamaan kopioita itsestään. Tuon takia me emme voi oikeastaan puhua elävästä oliosta.

 Puhuttaessa siitä että jossain rokotteessa käytetään "heikennettyä virusta", tarkoitetaan sitä, että viruksen perimä-aines tuhotaan esimerkiksi sähkömagneettisella säteilyllä ennen kuin niitä ruiskutetaan ihmiseen, eli ihmiseen siirretään oikeasti vain noiden virusten proteiinikuoria, mikä tekee tuosta rokotteissa käytettävästä viruksesta vaarattoman. Temppu perustuu siihen, että viruksen tai bakteerin aiheuttaman immuunivasteen tai tulehdusreaktion aiheuttaa nimittäin noiden eliöiden pinnalla oleva proteiini, ja siksi jos ihmiseen ruiskutetaan viruksen tai bakteerien kuoria, niin saadaan aikaan immuunivaste noita tauteja vastaan, mutta bakteerien kanssa ongelma on siinä, että niiden kuoren antigeeni eli proteiinirakenne saattaa muuttua, jolloin ihminen on immuuni tietenkin sitä bakteeria, jota vastaan rokote annetaan mutta ei mutantoitunutta kantaa vastaan.

Eli myös bakteereita vastaan voidaan luoda rokotteita, jos niiden pintarakenne on stabiili. Mutta kun puhutaan Ebolan hoidosta, niin tietenkin antiviraalilääkkeet voivat myös siihen tehota. Noiden lääkeiden tarkoitus on estää esimerkiksi solujen ionipumppuja ottamasta vastaan virusten perimä-ainesta, jolloin virusinfektio saadaan hoidettua. Kuitenkin eläviä keinotekoisia viruksia tullaan ehkä tulevaisuudessa kehittämään geeniterapian tarpeisiin, eli niissä ihmisen perimää korjataan, niin että tulevaisuudessa ehkä monia kehitysvammoja hoidetaan siten, että ihmiseen ruiskutetaan virusta, joka korjaa kromosomissa olevan DNA:n vaurioita.

http://www.mtv.fi/uutiset/ulkomaat/artikkeli/who-ebolarokote-saattaa-antaa-pian-tayden-suojan-tautia-vastaan/6237850


WHO:n kotisivu: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2016/ebola-vaccine-results/en/

NY-Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/22/health/ebola-vaccine.html?_r=0

pimeakronikka.blogspot.fi