A comedy show in the UK has just pulled off a rather well executed prank. It all got started earlier this week when Dan Richards, the "CEO" of a fake company called FameDaddy, appeared on a major morning television show. Richards, who is an actor in real life, spoke on live TV about his company, what he described as the world's "first celebrity sperm donor service." But after the airing, it quickly became clear that ITV wasn't alone in being duped; the story was subsequently picked up by the Telegraph and numerous media publications around the globe.

Eventually ITV and the Telegraph got the memo; it was all a prank, part of a satirical comedy program that is being produced by 2LE Media for Channel 4.

To their credit, the comedy troupe went to quite an extent to pull it off. In addition to having one of their actors appear on ITV's This Morning, they faked company records, set up a website, created a video, and provided a "company representative" to assure Telegraph journalists that the company was legit.

The story was subsequently picked up by media outlets in the US, Australia, China, and Canada.

The Telegraph has since removed their article, but the Globe & Mail still hasn't got the hint.

As for FameDaddy, the whole thing is actually quite funny. From their "official" website:

Most girls fantasise about dating their favourite boyband star, or having a fling with a Hollywood actor. Some will even wonder what a child from that union would be like, both its physical characteristics and potential for success. Fame Daddy is the only premium insemination service to now offer this unprecedented level of intimate VIP access.

Donor profiling is not new to the private fertility industry. Matches can be found according to preferences on race, eye colour, hair colour, religion, skin tone, nationality and education. Now, Fame Daddy goes one step further.

This soon-to-launch service will boast a top-flight client list of celebrity donors from the worlds of sport, entertainment and finance – all leaders in their fields, with a proven track record of success.

And when speaking to the Telegraph, Richards told them, "Whether it is talent on the stage or pitch, having a world-beating voice, or just being very beautiful, Fame Daddy will have the perfect celebrity surrogate daddy."

Commence the slow clap.

Six Italian scientists and one government official face six-year jail terms for failing to warn citizens about the ravaging effects of the L'Aquila 6.3 magnitude quake that killed 309 people in 2009. This morning, it took Judge Marco Billi just over four hours to reach this verdict.

Not surprisingly, the trial has outraged many in the scientific community, who feel that the seismologists should not be held responsible for something that's still impossible to predict. And indeed, a guilty verdict could establish a dangerous precedent as far as scientific accountability is concerned.

The prosecution's primary complaint is not so much that the government appointed panel of seismologists failed to predict the earthquake, but that they gave a falsely reassuring statement about its potential effects. The L'Aquila region had experienced two tremors prior to the earthquake, and local officials consulted the seismologists about whether or not it was a harbinger of things to come. In his closing statement, prosecuting attorney Fabio Picuti said the defendants had provided "an incomplete, inept, unsuitable and criminally mistaken" analysis which gave the residents of L'Aquila a false sense of security and led many to stay indoors when the first tremors hit. Science, they're arguing, did not do what was required.

The defense is claiming that science is being terribly overextended in this case, and that earthquakes are still impossible to predict, both in terms of their timing and magnitude. The seismologists' lawyer, Carlo Sica, said, "They are not guilty of anything, the earthquake's no-one's fault."

And many members of the scientific community are inclined to agree. More than 5,000 scientists recently signed an open letter to Italian president Giorgio Napolitano in support of the seismologists and geologists. The letter stated,

Years of research, much of it conducted by distinguished seismologists in your own country, have demonstrated that there is no accepted scientific method for earthquake prediction that can be reliably used to warn citizens of an impending disaster. To expect more of science at this time is unreasonable. It is manifestly unfair for scientists to be criminally charged for failing to act on information that the international scientific community would consider inadequate as a basis for issuing a warning. Moreover, we worry that subjecting scientists to criminal charges for adhering to accepted scientific practices may have a chilling effect on researchers, thereby impeding the free exchange of ideas necessary for progress in science and discouraging them from participating in matters of great public importance.

Similarly, a report commissioned by the Italian government after the L'Aquila disaster highlighted the many difficulties of predicting earthquakes, a phenomenon that is typically measured within decades — not weeks or months.

It is not known whether the defendants plan to appeal the ruling.

Sources: BBC, MSNBC.

Image: Macleans. Inset image: Reuters.

A recent Henry Ford Hospital study has shown the effectiveness of an unconventional therapy in which donated human stool can be used treat the deadly and contagious Clostridium difficile (C. diff) bacterial infection. The procedure, which works by revitalizing healthy intestinal microbial activity, could eventually replace the widescale use of antibiotics and surgery for treating the condition.

The technique, called intestinal microbiota transplantation (IMT), is another strong indication of how important our gut and intestinal flora are to our overall health. Essentially, by introducing uncontaminated microbes from a donated stool sample (typically from another family member), doctors have shown that a healthy intestinal microbiome can be re-established.

To conduct a microbial transplant, doctors take the stool from a healthy person and mix it with warm water. Mercifully, the solution is delivered directly to the patient's colon by use of a nasogastric tube — so they don't have to taste or smell it. And it works incredibly quickly; patients have been known to start eating and feeling better within a few hours after the transplant.

Indeed, according to lead researcher Mayur Ramesh, more than 90% of patients who were given the procedure were cured of their C. diff infection (from a sample of nearly 50 patients over the course of two years). IMT stimulated their immune system, allowing them to once again properly digest and absorb their food.

And this is a good thing; C. diff causes diarrhea and other problems like fever, loss of appetite, nausea, and abdominal pain. The infection is transmitted from person-to-person contact or from touching contaminated objects. And it is associated with 14,000 deaths each year.

Moreover, treating it has not been easy. Antibiotics like metronidazole or vancomycin have proven effective, but doctors are trying to reduce their reliance on these sorts of therapies. Part of the reason is that antibiotics may actually disrupt the normal balance of bacteria in our intestines, making it easier for C. diff to thrive.

As a result, what often ends up happening is surgery to have the infected part of the intestine physically removed. Having a poop cocktail directly administered into your colon, therefore, doesn't seem like such a bad alternative. The study was presented on Friday October 19, 2012 at the annual Infectious Diseases Society of America meeting in San Diego.

Image: Julien Tromeur/shutterstock.com.

It would appear that the Slovak-Hungarian "Blood Countess" Elizabeth Báthory may have been on to something: Researchers have shown that it is possible to reverse cognitive decline in old mice by injecting them with blood from the young. Elderly mice who were given transfusions of young blood were shown to exhibit improved learning skills and memory — and at a level comparable to much younger mice. Should the same effect apply to humans, it could represent a novel way to treat neurodegenerative disorders like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's.

A primary reason why we experience cognitive decline as we get older is due to our decreased production of neural stem cells — what ends up causing fewer connections between brain cells. Exercise has been known to help, but its effects are limited.

But Saul Villeda of Stanford University has shown that the production of these stem cells may have something to do with the quality of our blood.

He first made this discovery two years ago when he injected the blood of an older mouse into a younger one and vice versa. Villeda did this by connecting the circulatory systems of two mice so that their blood could mix (what's called heterochronic parabiosis). Soon after the transfusion he noticed that the younger mouse's brain started to age much more rapidly. And when he analyzed the older mouse, he observed that the number of stem cells had increased. His study led to a research paper that was later published in Nature.

More recently, Villeda's experiments have sought to determine whether or not this effect translates to behavioral changes as well. In the new study, he performed a similar transfusion and put the mice into a water maze where they were required to perform memory tasks. He discovered that the older mice did almost as well as mice who were four to six months old. As for the older, untreated mice, they made lots of mistakes and continually swam down blind alleys.

In terms of what's happening, the researchers say the young blood is likely reversing the aging process by topping up levels of key chemical factors that normally decline in the blood as we age. Speaking to the Guardian, Villeda noted that, after the transfusion, "all of a sudden you have all of these plasticity and learning and memory-related genes that are coming back." But as to which exact factors are causing the effect, the researchers are not sure — there are hundreds of thousands of candidate factors.

Looking ahead, Villeda says his team's insights could result in genuine rejuvenation therapies for people dealing with cognitive decline. The first step, however, is to determine whether or not this effect translates to humans.

Villeda presented these results at the annual meeting of the Society for Neuroscience in New Orleans on October 17, 2012. An earlier version of his research appeared in Nature last year.

Source: Guardian.

Image: via.

Scientists at Hunter College in NYC have genetically engineered mice to be 500 times more sensitive than normal to the smell of TNT. And because they're attracted to the smell, the researchers hope these "hero mice" will be used to detect landmines. Should the idea work, they anticipate the creation of other GMO mice that might some day be able to locate chemical and biological weapons as well.

Detecting landmines is not easy — it's time consuming, expensive, and very dangerous. Normally, metal detectors, radar, magnetometers, and sniffer dogs are used to find them, but so too are specially trained sniffer mice (who are not genetically modified). These mice don't trigger the bombs — they merely allow the minesweeping crew to figure out where the bombs are. But preparing these mice for this special tasks is an incredibly tedious and expensive process — about $7,842 per mouse.

But as Susan Young reports in Technology Review, the new genetically engineered mice could solve these problems, while at the same time providing an incredibly efficient method for bomb detection:

The genetically engineered mice...are so sensitive to TNT that encountering the molecule is likely to change their behavior involuntarily, so they would need little to no training. Charlotte D'Hulst, a molecular neurobiologist at Hunter College who presented her work at a meeting of the Society for Neuroscience, used genetic modification to ensure that the mice have 10,000 to 1,000,000 odor-sensing neurons with a TNT-detecting receptor compared with only 4,000 in a normal animal, "possibly amplifying the detection limit for this odor 500-fold," she says. Each odor-sensing neuron in a mouse's nose is spotted with one kind of odor receptor. Usually, each specific receptor is found in one out of every thousand odor-sensing neurons, but about half the scent-detecting neurons in D'Hulst's mice have the TNT-detecting receptor.

Essentially, the researchers have created a mouse with an "overwhelming dedication" to one particular odor. And isolating this receptor wasn't terribly difficult as TNT smells like bread (at least to the mice).

But not only that, it's also known that a sudden and intense stimulation of the olfactory system can make mice go into seizures — which is not a bad thing. Assuming that a sniffer mouse could be equipped with a location chip, it would go into one of these seizures when it finds the bomb, making it and the landmine easier to find (man, the things they do to mice).

Looking further ahead to the future, the researchers anticipate that other mice might be engineered to sniff out more dangerous compounds like chemical and biological weapons.

The study can be found at PubMed.

Top image: AP Photo | Robert F. Bukaty.

Many of you will remember Jenna Talackova, the Canadian Miss Universe nominee who had to fight for her right to compete at last year's pageant because she's transgendered (she won the appeal and finished in the top 12). Now, Talackova is asking the World Health Organization to remove transsexualism from their list of mental disorders. And her campaign appears to be getting attention — the petition has nearly 45,000 signatures thus far. Talackova writes:

I'm not sick. In fact I'm great! I'm a woman that had to undergo transgender medical procedures to become who I really am on in the inside.

But the World Health Organization (WHO) insists that I, and millions of other trans people are sick. The WHO actually considers transsexualism to be a mental disorder.

Since facing and overcoming discrimination for being a transgender woman back in March - when I was kicked out of and then re-admitted to the Miss Universe Pageant - I've been working to fight the stigma and discrimination facing people like me.

Join me in signing this petition and ask the World Health Organization to stop considering transsexual people mentally ill.

This also doesn't mean trans people shouldn't be included in the health system and provided with treatments, however, this has nothing to do with us being classified as mentally ill.

The WHO is definitely willing to reconsider their choices, and they're actually in the process of revising the list right now. If we all speak up I'm sure we can make a difference.

Talackova's petition comes at a time when the American Psychiatric Association is developing a new non-disordered classification of gender dysphoria. So now would be a good time for WHO to follow suit. You can sign the petition here.

H/t ThinkProgress. Top image: Vogue.

Anthropologists in the UK have constructed a remarkably life-like model of a Neanderthal man from a 70,000 year-old skeleton that was discovered in France over a century ago.

In 1909, scientists discovered the remains of a group of Neanderthals at La Ferrassie cave in the Dordogne region. One of the Neanderthals, which they named La Ferrassie 1, had a skeleton that was particularly well preserved — and it was this skeleton that served as the template for the reconstruction. The missing parts — the thorax, ribs, pelvis and some spinal pieces — were replaced by the bones of a Neanderthal discovered at Kebara Cave in Israel in 1982.

What makes LF1's remains particularly unique is that it features the largest and most complete Neanderthal skull ever found. His leg and foot bones were a revelation to anthropologists at the time as it proved that these hominids walked upright. The skeletal remains also revealed that they were stocky, had strong arms and hands, and they had large skulls that were longer and lower than ours — including a sloping forehead and virtually non-existent chin.

The reconstruction itself was performed by a multi-disciplinal team that was comprised of both anthropologists and model makers. And as the BBC reports, the attention to detail was second to none:

The team studied the ways Neanderthals hunted their prey and carried out domestic chores, noting the impact those actions had on their bodies.

They concluded that they would have repeatedly stabbed their prey - the woolly mammoth - with spears, but that the really intense work would have been making garments to survive the cold climate.

A Neanderthal would have needed a new garment every year, which would have been made up of approximately five or six hides. They would have needed to scrape each hide for eight hours to make it wearable.

On the basis of this evidence La Ferrassie 1's muscles, including those in the strong right arm, were reconstructed accordingly and layered on in clay.

And it went on like this for each phase of the project. The end result is nothing short of spectacular — an incredibly accurate model of a Neanderthal man — one that even exudes a kind of presence.

Be sure to watch a sneak peak of the BBC show Prehistoric Autopsy where the anthropologists and model makers get to see the finished product for the very first time. But just be warned — the poor fellow wasn't given so much as a loin cloth, so it's potentially NSFW.

Source and images: BBC.

A handwritten letter penned by Albert Einstein shortly before his death in 1954 has sold to an unknown online bidder for $3,000,100.00. In the so-called "God Letter," Einstein touched upon such themes as religion, tribalism — and his disbelief in a biblical God.

The historical document is particularly important because it dispels the myth that Einstein was religious and that he believed in God. His famous quote, "God does not play dice with the Universe," suggested to some that he harbored religious views. Today, historians suspect that he used the term as a kind of colloquial metaphor for such things as the laws of physics, or even the totality of the cosmos itself.

The private letter, which was written to the Jewish philosopher Eric Gutkind, was fairly scathing in its remarks. Einstein wrote, "...The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can (for me) change this..."

The anonymous seller of the letter acquired it from Bloomsbury Auctions in London in 2008 for $404,000. Since that time, it has been preserved in a temperature-controlled vault. The seller placed the starting bid at $3M, hoping that it would sell for double or triple that amount. But after just two bids, it settled at the still monumental price of $3,000,100 on October 18. It's worth noting that Richard Dawkins was reportedly interested in acquiring the letter.

The key passages of the letter reads like this (translated from German):

... I read a great deal in the last days of your book, and thank you very much for sending it to me. What especially struck me about it was this. With regard to the factual attitude to life and to the human community we have a great deal in common.

... The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. These subtilised interpretations are highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with the original text. For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are also no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them.

In general I find it painful that you claim a privileged position and try to defend it by two walls of pride, an external one as a man and an internal one as a Jew. As a man you claim, so to speak, a dispensation from causality otherwise accepted, as a Jew the privilege of monotheism. But a limited causality is no longer a causality at all, as our wonderful Spinoza recognized with all incision, probably as the first one. And the animistic interpretations of the religions of nature are in principle not annulled by monopolization. With such walls we can only attain a certain self-deception, but our moral efforts are not furthered by them. On the contrary.

Now that I have quite openly stated our differences in intellectual convictions it is still clear to me that we are quite close to each other in essential things, i.e; in our evaluations of human behavior. What separates us are only intellectual 'props' and 'rationalization' in Freud's language. Therefore I think that we would understand each other quite well if we talked about concrete things.

With friendly thanks and best wishes,
Yours, A. Einstein

Top image via AP/Reuters. H/t Why Evolution is True.

Women who feel moody or grouchy before getting their periods shouldn't blame it all on their hormones, say researchers from the University of Toronto. According to a new meta-analysis of PMS studies, the research team concluded that it is not real — that there is no clear link between women's negative moods and the premenstrual phase of their cycles. The time has come, they say, to put the myth aside.

The researchers, a team lead by psychologist Gillian Einstein, took a look at 47 English language studies found on PubMed, PsycINFO, and various article bibliographies. They conducted a critical analysis of the daily mood data presented in these studies, but could not find any clear evidence that premenstrual syndrome exists.

Specifically, here's what they found:

• 18 studies (38.3%) found no association of mood with any negative emotion phase (MC phase)
• 18 studies (38.3%) found an association of negative mood in the premenstrual phase — but combined with another MC phase
• 7 studies (14.9%) found an association of negative mood and the premenstrual phase
• The remaining 4 studies (8.5%) showed an association between negative mood and non-premenstrual phases

• It's pretty revealing that only 14.9% studies could link a negative emotional phase with the premenstrual phase, and that 8.5% could link negative emotions with other non-premenstrual phases.

  Likewise, Einstein's own research on women's hormonal levels could not establish any kind of association. She concluded that, with a few exceptions, neither absolute hormone levels nor menstrual cycle phases were responsible for altering the moods of women.

  Speaking through a release, Einstein had this to say: "Before women even get their first period, they have heard about PMS. The notion is so ingrained in our culture that some of these studies are actually biased because women know the study is about PMS." And just as bad, she feels that the "PMS myth" is perpetuating negative concepts that link female reproduction with negative emotions.

  It's important to note that the review did not look into the existence of premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD) — a clinical mood disorder associated with the menstrual cycle (one that is characterized by severe physical and behavioural symptoms in the latter half of the menstrual cycle). The study also did not discount the existence of physical symptoms such as bloating and cramping related to the premenstrual phase.

  The entire study can be read at Gender Medicine.

  Image: CREATISTA/Shutterstock. Inset image via UofT.

A report published by the Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) has declared that the experimental phase of a human egg freezing technique is now over and that the procedure can now enter into standard clinical practice. This new phase likely means that universal donar egg banking is right around the corner.

The freezing technique, which is called vitrification, is the process of preserving eggs (or any cells for that matter) by applying high concentrations of cryoprotectant followed by ulta-rapid cooling to solidify cells into a glass-like substance. And because ice doesn't form on the cell, its integrity is preserved. The procedure is also being used to freeze embryos, ovarian tissue — and even human bodies (a la cryonics).

But back in 2008, when the vitrification technique was relatively new, the ASRM had put out a preliminary report warning of potential risks. But now, after analyzing over 1,000 papers on the subject, the Committee found the proof they were looking for, declaring that the studies had, "demonstrate[d] acceptable success rates in young highly selected populations."

Now that said, the report made it clear that women who have stored their eggs, or what are more technically called oocytes, should probably get to a pregnancy sooner rather than later. According to the report, "success rates with oocyte cryopreservation via either slow-freeze or vitrification appear to decline with maternal age consistent with the clinical experience with fresh oocytes." Some researchers noticed that pregnancies and delivery rates started to decline after the age of 34.

The report also noted that there isn't enough data yet to know how long eggs can be cryopreserved — but that said, clinicians haven't noticed any problems with oocytes stored for as long as 48 months.

Moreover, the studies also showed that implantation and pregnancy rates may be lower when frozen oocytes are used when compared to fresh, previously unfrozen eggs. That said, the rate was not significant enough to cause any concern.

As for the practice itself, preserving eggs offers women a number of advantages. For special, doctor-prescribed cases, eggs can now be stored until such time as a woman has found the right male donor. It will also allow women to time their pregnancies. And given the prospect of lost fertility on account of chemotherapy (or other gonadotoxic therapies), women can now store their eggs for future use — potentially for eventual fertilization and implantation in a surrogate mother.

Now all this said, the report did not go so far as to endorse the practice for elective use. Because it's still early days, women can only have their eggs frozen on recommendation from their physicians. But looking ahead, and assuming more widespread clinic-specific data on the safety and efficacy of oocyte cryopreservation, it's expected that universal donor egg banking will someday become available (what the authors call Level B).

You can read the entire report here.

Top image: Ekem Inset image via.

Evolutionary biologists have theorized for some time now that grandmothers are responsible for our relatively long lifespans. The idea is that, by virtue of caregiving grandmothers, daughters were free to have more offspring. Consequently, selectional pressures favored proto-humans who had long lives — a trait that got passed down from generation to generation. Now, all this sounds great on paper, but it has completely lacked proof. Until now.

Postmenopausal longevity has baffled biologists for decades. Theoretically, it doesn't make a whole lot of evolutionary sense for individuals to live beyond their child-rearing years. There must be some explanation, therefore, for why humans live way past their reproductive expiry date. This is why the so-called "grandmother hypothesis" has been a particularly exciting area of inquiry. It essentially suggests that grandmas "subsidize" their daughters' fertility when they take care of their own grandchildren.

To prove this — or at the very least show that the theory is mathematically sound — University of Utah anthropologist Kristen Hawkes turned to the power of computer simulations. She began with the assumption that early humans had the same lifespan as chimpanzees (about 30-40 years), but then added such variables as the age at which a grandmother could start to take care of a grandchild, the resultant reproduction rate, mutation rates, and so on.

After pressing the go button and allowing the process to unfold for generation upon generations, Hawkes's simulation showed that the simulated proto-humans went from having a chimp-like lifespan to a human-like lifespan in less than 60,000 years. Specifically, her models revealed that the presence of caregiving grandmothers endowed her simulants with an additional 49 years of life after adulthood was reached (which contrasts to the 25 years found in chimps). And in fact, depending on the variables, it could have taken as little as 24,000 years.

In other words, Hawkes's model showed that the presence of grandmothers doubled human adult-lifespan over a relatively short period of evolutionary time (essentially, a few thousand generations).

And in terms of the variables, Hawkes erred on the side of caution by making the effect as "weak" as possible. For instance, she assumed that a female couldn't be a grandmother until the age of 45 or after 75, that she couldn't care for the child until it was two years-old, and that she could only care for one child at a time (but it did not have to be her own grandchild). The simulation also assumed that newborns had a 5% chance of a gene mutation that could lead to either a shorter or longer lifespan — a figure that was derived from earlier research.

Moreover, the model started with the assumption that only 1% of females were able to live to a grandmothering stage. But as the simulation showed, it only took 24,000 to 60,000 years for the bots to achieve a lifespan comparable to human hunter-gatherers (in which about 43% of adult women are grandmothers).

It's worth noting that, for the sake of scientific thoroughness, Hawkes also took male lifespans into account. Specifically, she had to make some assumptions about the costs imposed on males due to increased longevity. Males had to put more energy and metabolism into maintaining their now longer-lived bodies, so Hawkes suspects they put less effort into competing with other males over females during young adulthood. To this end, she tested three different degrees to which males were competitive during the reproductive phase.

Hawkes's study also excluded assumptions about brain size, learning, or pair bonds — showing that these variables were not required to produce the life-extending effect.

You can read the entire study at Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

Top image somchai rakin/shutterstock. Inset image: Lee J. Siegel, University of Utah.

The winners of the 2012 Veolia Environnement Wildlife Photographer of the Year competition have been announced — and this year's crop is expectedly great. The competition, which is now in its 48th year, is an "international showcase for the very best nature photography," according to London's Natural History Museum and Wildlife magazine. Here's a quick sampling.

The banner image, called "Crouch, pause, action" shows a bobcat in the midst of the hunt. Photographer Joe Sulik describes the moment: "She was crouched in the long grass, all hunched up, watching for prey. I saw her shift her weight to her hind legs. I knew I had just a fraction of a second to get ready for the shot." And then the bobcat pounced. (Photograph courtesy Joe Sulik, VEWPOY).

"Midnight snack" (Photograph courtesy Alexander Badyaev, VEWPOY).

"Last Wild Picture"
(Photograph courtesy Steve Winter, VEWPOY).

"Flight Path" (Photograph courtesy Owen Hearn, VEWPOY)

"Snow Pounce" (Photograph courtesy Richard Peters, VEWPOY)

"The Snow Herd" (Photograph courtesy Vladimir Medvedev, VEWPOY)

"Living on Thin Ice" (Photograph courtesy Ole Jørgen Liodden, VEWPOY). The entire gallery can be found here. [H/t National Geographic]

Based on the wild popularity of shows like Dexter and CSI, it would seem our fascination with the ultra-creepy criminals called serial killers knows no bounds. But why do these unusual murderers exist? And how can insights into their behavior be used against them? Here's what you need to know about the mind of a serial killer.

Serial killers have existed throughout history (like Elizabeth Báthory and Jack the Ripper), but it wasn't until the 1970s and the seminal work of FBI investigator Robert Ressler that the phenomenon finally received formal recognition. Today, much of the work done by the FBI and other investigative units are extensions of Ressler's early work (including criminal profiling, which we'll get to in just a bit).

What makes a serial killer?

But even after years of research, neuroscientists, psychologists, and behavioral scientists have still not come to a consensus on what makes someone a serial killer. According to experts Ronald Holmes and Stephen Holmes, there simply hasn't been enough serial killers to study. And it's because of this, they say, that no meaningful scientific statement can be made about the exact role that biology plays in creating these modern day monsters.

Now that said, psychologists are not running blind — they have pinpointed some likely factors. Some serial killers were abused as children — either emotionally, physically, or sexually. Many are compelled by sexual fantasies that have gotten out of control, sometimes driven by overlapping psychological disorders like schizophrenia and psychopathy.

And indeed, many serial killers are in fact psychopaths — that much we know. Murderers who rank high on the Hare psychopathy scale are often motivated by an overwhelming desire to control things and exert their will on others by whatever means possible. For some, this leads to periodic violent behavior. But not all serial killers are psychopaths, and vice versa (by an absolutely massive margin).

As work on serial killers continues, therefore, we may very well discover that there is not just one type or one cause that's responsible for it all.

What defines a serial murder?

Now, as Resler's work with the FBI attests, the first step in catching a serial killer is in recognizing that one exists — something that's easier said than done; it's not always obvious that a serial killer is involved. In some situations, like the Robert Pickton case in Canada, it can take years for the police to realize that they have a serial killer on their hands — an oversight or mistake that, like in the Pickton case, can cost dozens of lives.

Many investigators define a serial killer as someone who has killed three or more people in separate incidents over a period of more than a month — an interval that they refer to as a "cooling off period."

But late last decade the FBI adopted a more liberal definition, stating that a serial murder is more properly defined as the "unlawful killing of two or more victims by the same offender(s), in separate events." They also noted that a serial murder can involve one or more offenders, and that a requisite time period between murders needs to exist to distinguish them from mass murderers (who tend to go on a single killing spree, such as the horrors perpetrated by Anders Breivik and James Holmes).

But the moment that two or more cases can be associated, the investigators can then start to change gears and adapt their techniques accordingly.

How are serial killers profiled?

Trying to find a serial killer can be like looking for a needle in a haystack. Thankfully, investigators have some tools that can give them a broad sense of where in that daunting haystack that needle might be located.

Given that many investigations have virtually nothing to go by aside from what the forensic scientists have uncovered, police have turned to a technique called ‘offender profiling' in which they create a rough sketch or prediction of the person they're looking for. These profiles are compiled by referring to years of accumulated data, along with the insights gleaned from psychologists and neuroscientists. Serial killers, it should come as no surprise, have certain behavioral patterns, traits and characteristics that are fairly predictable.

Surprisingly, police have learned that a serial killer's motivation is one of the more unhelpful elements in an investigation. Serial murders are typically committed for psychological gratification, and not for any material or tactical gain. Their motivations tend to be driven by hedonism, sexual satisfaction, the thrill, lust, and a sense of dominance — aspects that make for weak clues.

What's more insightful for investigators are the commonalities that can help them outline their perpetrator. For example, serial killers tend to be males in their 20s and 30s (spiking around the age of 28) who tend to kill within their own racial group. While these are admittedly gross generalizations, they create a probabilistic profile that eliminates a huge swath of the general population, allowing the investigators to narrow their search.

But there are other patterns as well. Serial killers tend to use the same method of killing every time, and their victims are often of a certain type (such as prostitutes, or a certain age group). These killers encompass all races in fairly similar proportions (the notion that whites have a higher propensity for serial killing is a myth) who target strangers that live near their home or places of work.

Interestingly, female serial killers are exceptionally rare, and those who are often fall outside of most profiling schemas. Women tend to know their victims (who are almost always male), they murder them for material gain, and are often part of a serial killing team (typically with a man). Notorious examples include Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka, and more recently, Terri-Lynne McClintic and Michael Rafferty (who were mercifully caught before they had a chance to kill more than once).

It's worth noting that Aileen Wuornos, who was featured in the film Monster, is a very rare exception to these rules; her killing behavior was very much like that of a man's.

Organized or disorganized?

Perhaps the broadest and most telling of the profile categories is in determining whether or not the killer is "organized" or "disorganized."

Organized killers typically have above average intelligence and are very discreet and careful about their crimes. They are are also known to be sociable, they have friends, a stable job, and even families — the kind of person no one would suspect.

This runs in stark contrast to the disorganized killer. Their crimes are more impulsive and often executed with whatever weapon is available at the time. Their crime scenes tend to be a mess and they're not typically careful about how they dispose of the body. Some are necrophiliacs and have a history of mental illness. For disorganized killers, their motivations tend to be about exerting extreme physical and/or sexual violence and fulfilling some kind of fantasy.

But just to make life difficult for investigators, there is also the ‘mixed' killer — a perpetrator who exhibits both organized and disorganized characteristics. The classic example of this is Jeffrey Dahmer, a methodical and careful killer who was searching for a "perfect lover." But at the same time, he dismembered his victims, kept body parts in his freezer, and tried to bring corpses back to life by drilling into their skulls. He also experimented with cannibalism to "ensure his victims would always be a part of him."

What are the limits of profiling?

Indeed, the Jeffrey Dahmer example provides a potent and upsetting example of how limited and even misleading criminal profiling can be. Not only did he have mixed characteristics, he also killed outside of his racial group. And because he killed men (Dahmer was gay), this confused the investigators.

And during the Beltway sniper attacks, for example, the police profile described a white male in his 30s from the DC area who was acting alone. In reality, the crimes were committed by two black males, one of whom was 41 and the other 17 years old — and both from the west coast.

These cases, plus an array of other factors, have even led some observers to declare that criminal profiling is both misleading and unscientific. Back in 2007, Malcolm Gladwell railed against the practice in the New Yorker by complaining that, "It doesn't do any good to get a specific detail right if you get general details wrong." He writes:

A profile isn't a test, where you pass if you get most of the answers right. It's a portrait, and all the details have to cohere in some way if the image is to be helpful. In the mid-nineties, the British Home Office analyzed a hundred and eighty-four crimes, to see how many times profiles led to the arrest of a criminal. The profile worked in five of those cases. That's just 2.7 per cent, which makes sense if you consider the position of the detective on the receiving end of a profiler's list of conjectures. Do you believe the stuttering part? Or do you believe the thirty-year-old part? Or do you throw up your hands in frustration?

To be fair, profiling is, at best, a tool that can help investigators steer the direction of the investigation. And indeed, analyses of successful investigations often show that the profiling was quite accurate. A good example comes from psychologist and criminologist David Canter who, in a 1986 case, created a profile for John Duffy in which 13 of his 17 predictions were absolutely spot on.

But Gladwell is right when he says that profiling very rarely leads to an arrest or a solid lead — but it can help to short-list potential offenders and confer confidence to the officers during the the arrest process.

To catch a killer

More often than not, serial killers are typically caught as a result of their own carelessness. Some get nabbed during their first crime as a result of their inexperience, while others get sloppy and over-confident after a few years and make a mistake.

Also, it's not uncommon for an escaped witness to identify the killer (which is how Dahmer got caught), or for a murderer to get caught during the act itself. Some are caught with a body in the trunk of their car (Ted Bundy was arrested during a routine traffic stop). And a prior history of misconduct will often put a killer under suspicion, which often leads to surveillance and an eventual arrest. Or, when working as a team, one will turn the other in. And David Berkowitz, the "Son of Sam," was initially picked up for loitering — the police thought he was a witness to the crimes instead of the killer.

There's always something to be said for serendipity.

Other sources:

• J Apsche: Probing the mind of a serial killer
• Robert Ressler: Whoever Fights Monsters: My Twenty Years Tracking Serial Killers for the FBI
• FBI: Serial Murder: Multi-Disciplinary Perspectives for Investigators
• Holmes & Holmes: Profiling Violent Crimes: An Investigative Tool (4 ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
• Holmes & Holmes: Serial Murder
• Pat Brown Profiling
• Peter Vronsky: Serial Killers: The Method and Madness of Monsters

• Images: Showtime, "Illustrated London News" (public domain), Hannibal, Aileen, Dahmer, Gacy.

It doesn't look like much, but once operational, this little satellite could serve as a key tool in the search for extraterrestrial life. Called Cheops, short for CHaracterising ExOPlanets Satellite, the European-launched device will target solar systems known to host exoplanets. And by analyzing the spectral signatures of these exoplanets, the space-based telescope will help astronomers identify planets capable of harboring life.

The project is part of the European Space Agency's effort to develop low cost and small scale missions that can be quickly put together. Cheops, which will be developed as a partnership between the ESA and Switzerland (along with contributions from other member states), is expected to launch some time in 2017.

Interestingly, the project marks an important turning point as far as the search for exoplanets goes. Cheops will be the first satellite dedicated to scanning known planets for key signatures instead of just searching for them. And this makes complete sense; astronomers have located over 840 planets outside our solar system. It's time we started to take a closer look.

Astronomers will do this by using the transmit method. Aplanet's radius can be measured when it passes in front of its parent star, which can in turn help astronomers calculate such things as its density. It will also help astronomers distinguish between gas giants and rocky super-Earths. Lastly, it will also identify planets that have significant atmospheres (including the composition of its various gasses).

Cheops will do its work in a Sun-synchronous low-Earth orbit at an altitude of 800 km (500 miles) over the course of 3.5 years.

[ESA]

Images: University of Bern.

It seems like we're getting closer to the Star Trek future by leaps and bounds these days. We recently learned that a NASA scientist has set his sights on building a warp drive, and now news has come in that a team of physicists have built their own tractor beam in the lab. Now, it's nothing to get too excited over — they used an optical beam to pull a 30 micrometer silica sphere suspended in water — but the demonstration proved that a tractor beam can actually exist.

We've known about the power of Bessel beams for some time now, including their potential to act as a kind of tractor beam. This optical phenomenon was first discovered by Friedrich Bessel over a hundred years ago, and has since been applied by microbiologists as a kind of tweezer.

But up until this point no one has been able to prove that a Bessel beam can actually function as a kind of tractor beam. So, in an effort to make it work, physicists David Ruffner and David Grier sought to harness a rather unique property of Bessel beams.

Specifically, these laser beams are capable of reconstructing themselves on the opposite side of an object. Subsequently, the theory is that these beams can pull an object back towards the stream of light — not unlike a tractor beam.

So, in an effort to create this ‘optical conveyor,' Ruffner and Grier adjusted the periodic intensity of the Bessel beam's axis so that it could optically trap the micrometer silica sphere. Then, by changing the beam's relative phase, the trapped object was selectively moved both upstream and downstream along the conveyor. Unlike previous (failed) experiments, they were able to do this by multiple lenses that could slightly bend the beams and cause them to overlap — what caused a strobe effect behind the particle, which provided the required energy to draw the object back towards the source.

And not only that, the physicists say that the same method can be used to combine multiple Bessel beams to create a series of overlapping optical conveyors — what could result in the bidirectional transport of microscale objects in three dimensions.

But as PhysOrg reports, the tiny tractor beam may not be scalable — at least not for the foreseeable future. The creation of a space-based tractor beam like the one portrayed in Star Trek would require a tremendous amount of energy — enough to destroy the object that it's trying to pull in. But that said, the breakthrough indicates that a similar device might be possible by using a less energy intensive energy source.

The Ruffner and Grier paper was published in Physical Review Letters and can be found here. Alternately, you can read a version of it at Grier's homepage.

Images: CBS, University of St. Andrews, New York University via PhysOrg.

It was probably the most fearsome battle to ever take place in the animal kingdom: The super-apex predator Tyrannosaurus versus the heavily armored Triceratops. Based on the fossil records, paleontologists have known for quite some time that the two Cretaceous-era dinosaurs often went head-to-head. But given the triceratops' extensive defenses, it has never been clear how the T-rex was able to penetrate through the thick shielding when it came time for the feast. But new research has revealed how it was done — and it wasn't pretty.

Step #1: Grab hold of the frill: According to work presented last week at the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology's annual meeting in Raleigh, North Carolina, the T-rex, upon killing the triceratops, worked to position itself such that it could take hold of the frill with its massive jaws.

Step #2: Tear the back of the neck: Once the T-rex could grab hold, it pulled the head back, thus creating tension and a subsequent tear in the flesh. The researchers, a team lead by Denver Fowler at the Museum of the Rockies in Bozeman, Montana, were able to make this determination by studying the bite marks found on the fossilized remains of 18 triceratops. Fowler believes that the T-rex's laterally thickened tooth structure made it well suited for resisting lateral stressess — a characteristic that would have substantially improve its ability to dismember carcasses.

Step #3: Rip the head off: When studying the fossils, particularly the skulls, Fowler noticed that many of the bones showed no signs of healing. This suggested that the bite marks were made after death and during the meal itself (what paleontologists refer to as postmortem carcass processing). And in addition, many of the specimens featured puncture, score, gouge, and puncture-pull marks, which in combination with tooth-spacing patterns, indicated that the marks were inflicted during the feast.

Step #4: Time to eat: The paleontologists theorize that the T-rex worked hard to get the head off so that it could get to the nutrient rich neck muscles. Fowler says this is consistent with deep parallel gouge marks found on the skull, including punctured braincases. And interestingly, the paleontologists were also able to determine that the T-rex liked to gnaw the flesh off the triceratops' face.

It's worth noting that some paleontologists dispute the predator/prey relationship between the two species. One theory is that the T-rex simply scavenged on the remains of dead triceratops, and that the elaborate armor and horns were simply ornamental/courtship displays. It's also possible that the horns were used in combat with each other and not against T-rexes. And indeed, there is evidence that the horns were used in combat (and were not just ornaments) — it's just not clear who the horns were used against. But regardless, there's little doubt that the T-rex ate the remains of triceratops.

You can check out the study at Fowler's homepage.

Top image via. All inset illustrations via Nate Carroll. H/t Nature.

Three years ago, scientists discovered electric currents running through the seabed — but they had no idea what was causing it. But now, researchers from Denmark and the United States believe they have the answer: bacteria that function as living electric cables. In a remarkable case of biological engineering, scientists have confirmed that each tiny section of the bacteria contains a bundle of insulated wires that leads an electric current from one end to the other.

The discovery could lead to an entirely new class of organic electronics — including devices that could be implanted in the human body.

According to Nils Risgaard-Petersen, Christian Pfeffer, and their colleagues at Aarhus University, they started to suspect that something was up when they noticed the appearance of a previously unknown type of long, multi-cellular bacteria. These bacteria were always present when electric currents were around. Moreover, they could disrupt the currents when they pulled a thin wire through the seabed — a possible indication of broken connections.

Looking at it more closely, they noticed that the bacteria, which is a hundred times thinner than a human hair, contained nanoscale strings that were enclosed by a membrane. They concluded that the entire organism functions as a virtual electric cable — insulating wires and all. And indeed, the researchers note that the structure is very similar to the electric cables that we use on a daily basis.

The researchers theorize that the adaptation gives the bacterium a distinct advantage over other oceanic microbes. Collectively, when they sit in an undisturbed seabed, they extend tens of thousands of kilometers of cable within a single square meter (10.76 square feet). Their ability to conduct a current allows them to pull in vast amounts of energy that's put out through seabed decomposition. And in fact, a single teaspoon of mud can contain as much of one kilometer of living electric cables.

Another unique characteristic of the bacteria is that it can maintain efficient combustion in the oxygen-free part of the seabed. It does this by forming a chain where one individual bacterium extends out into the oxygen-rich area of the seawater; all that's required is a few millimeters. When the combustion happens, there is a transfer of the electrons of the food to oxygen. The bacteria manage this transfer over a distance of about a centimeter. And like any electric cable, any disturbance can lead to a fatal breakage — and an end to the current.

Looking to the future, the new insight could inspire developments in the nascent field of organic electronics. Assuming that a similar kind of bacteria (or other microorganisms) can be engineered, these biological systems could be used to conduct currents in advanced electronic devices, or even in prosthetic devices for humans.

Check out the entire study in Nature.

Top image: Nils Risgaard-Petersen; Mingdong Dong, Jie Song and Nils Risgaard-Petersen

DARPA, the Pentagon's techno-happy think tank, has announced a contest to spur the development of robots that could lend a helping hand during an emergency. The competition involves several tracks — including one to program the software for a pre-existing humanoid bot, and one to create a robot that can take on any form. The winners of the contest will take home a $2 million prize.

The humanoid robot will be supplied by Boston Dynamics (see the video above) — the same research wing that brought us Big Dog and Cheetah. The competitors are expected to program the robot so that it can do such things as drive vehicles, climb over debris, operate power tools, and control machines and valves.

Extra points will be awarded to those robots who can perform as autonomously as possible — an attribute that would be of considerable benefit during a crisis. For example, during the Fukushima disaster last year, operators had a difficult time communication with and controlling their robots, on account of the thick walls. A robot that could act on its own would clearly be an important asset.

For the other contest tracks, developers will be asked to create rescue bots that can perform the same set of tasks. But unlike the humanoid portion of the contest, their robots can take on any shape and size. According to the New York Times, for example, JPL is working on a robot that has three legs and one arm.

Two other contests will take place by programming virtual robots in a computer simulation, which should allow competitors to compete from around the world.

Source: NYT; inset image via Boston Dynamics.

The prospect of growing crops in vertical farms directly inside of cities has been on the collective wish-list of environmentalists, sustainable developers, and futurists for quite some time now. And now it looks like it's finally starting to happen. Land-strapped Singapore has opened its first vertical farm — an innovation that will increase the variety of foods it has available and decrease its dependance on foreign imports.

And indeed, a major problem facing Singapore (and many other cities) today is land scarcity. Located at the tip of the Malay Peninsula, it is an island country that consists of a mere 710 square kilometers (271 square miles) — and most of it is developed and urbanized. Today, only 7% of Singapore's vegetables are grown locally. But by virtue of the new facility, it's looking to change the situation.

Developed by Sky Greens Farms, the vertical farm consists of 120 aluminum towers that extend over 9 meters (30 feet) in height. In total, the vertical farm is able to produce vegetables at a rate of 0.5 tonnes per day. The company is hoping to attract investors so that it can devote another USD$21M dollars for upgrades. Ideally, they'd like to construct as many as 300 towers — enough to produce two tonnes of vegetables per day.

Currently, the farm is able to grow three kinds of vegetables, and they can only be found at the local FairPrice Finest supermarkets, but at a price that's 10 to 20 cents more than vegetables from other sources. But according to Channel News Asia, customers are enthusiastic about the new products and the supermarkets are struggling to keep the vegetables in stock. Moreover, Sky Greens expects the price to drop as the farm ramps up supply.

Source and image: Channel News Asia.

Folks out on the East coast of the United States and Canada are bracing themselves for what could be a remarkably severe storm, one that has been dubbed 'Frankenstorm' on account of its tripartite composition. The mega-storm is expected to make landfall early next week just as three major weather systems collide — including Hurricane Sandy which is currently ravaging parts of the Caribbean. Here's what you need to know about the storm of the year.

What is it?

The Frankenstorm, which got its name from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration forecaster Jim Cisco, will be the result of three major weather systems coming together.

The primary engine fueling the storm will be the remnants of Hurricane Sandy, a Category 2 storm that is currently making life miserable in Haiti and Cuba. Once it makes its way up the East coast, it will be reinvigorated by an early winter storm coming in from the West, and a blast of arctic air from the North.

And as if to add insult to injury, the storm will co-incide with a full moon — a time when tides are at their highest. Government meteorologists say there's a 90% chance that the storm will hit as predicted, up from 60% two days ago.

Speaking to the AP, Cisco noted, "We don't have many modern precedents for what the models are suggesting." He worries that it could be historic in terms of its scope and the damage it may inflict.

Where and when will it hit?

The storm will have an impact on coastal areas ranging from Florida to the Canadian Maritime provinces, but the full force of its effects will be felt in New Jersey and New York City. It's expected to reach these areas on Sunday October 28, with the brunt of it hitting on Tuesday October 30.

And the storm could linger. Meteorologists are worried that it could stall and batter the area for as much as five to six days, not leaving until some time around November 1 or 2.

How serious will it be?

Extremely serious. This is an unprecedented storm for which the models are predicting some fairly serious effects. Coastal areas can expect gale-force winds, heavy rain, extreme tides, flooding, and possibly snow.

Experts predict it could cause as much as $1 billion in damages.

Writing in the Weather Underground blog, Jeff Masters had this to say:

Landfall Monday along the mid-Atlantic coast on Monday, as predicted by the ECMWF and NOGAPS models, would likely be a billion-dollar disaster. In this scenario, Sandy would be able to bring sustained winds near hurricane force over a wide stretch of heavily populated coast, causing massive power outages, as trees still in leaf fall and take out power lines. Sandy is expected to have tropical storm-force winds that extend out more than 300 miles from the center, which will drive a much larger storm surge than its winds would ordinarily suggest. The full moon is on Monday, which means astronomical tides will be at their peak for the month, increasing potential storm surge flooding. Fresh water flooding from heavy rains would also be a huge concern. Given the ECMWF's consistent handling of Sandy, I believe this mid-Atlantic scenario has a higher probability of occurring than the Northeast U.S. scenario. However, it is likely that the models are overdoing the strength of Sandy at landfall. The models have trouble handling the transition from tropical storm to extratropical storm in these type of situations, and I expect that the 940 mb central pressure of Sandy predicted at landfall Monday in Delaware by the ECMWF model is substantially overdone.

And indeed, many districts are already preparing.

New York's Mayor Michael Bloomberg has opened an emergency situation room and activated its coast storm plan. Jersey Central Power & Light has told its employees to prepare for extended shifts. Utilities have been in contact with out-of-state work crews in anticipation of needing assistance, and canceling employees' days off. And President Barack Obama is receiving regular updates.

How can I keep track?

If you're in an area scheduled to get hit, stay tuned to your local weather forecasts. And you might just want to put some fresh batteries in your transistor radio in case the power goes out. You can also follow updates at the National Weather Service website or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Credit: NOAA/National Hurricane Center.