The Biomedical Scientist

I have never smoked a cigarette, let alone touched one, for the 19 years I have been living on this planet. I find the concept of orally inhaling smoke that will eventually end up damaging my throat and lungs to be very off-putting. However, I do realize how many smokers want to quit, but aren’t able to do so without slowly building it off.

As you stated in your blog, electronic cigarettes were created as an alternative to regular cigarettes. Up until now, there has been limited evidence that e-cigarettes can actually help to diminish the use of cigarettes amid smokers with the intention of quitting. In addition, the potential consequences of using this ‘substitute’ for cigarettes aren’t fully discovered yet, not for short-term nor long-term use. So, though electronic cigarettes appear to be healthier in a certain sense, they are not risk-free. ^[1]

On the 15th of December, the first research paper concerning the health effects of e-cigarettes was published. In this study, it was revealed that people who smoke traditional cigarettes have a higher chance of developing chronic lung diseases compared to people who only use e-cigarettes. Though this makes it seem like the electronic cigarette is way better than a regular one, the electronic version is not entirely innocent. Said paper provides extra evidence that vaping causes harm to your body, this can vary from chemical burns to long tissue to overheated batteries that can explode. ^[2]

Furthermore, most people who start using e-cigarettes as an alternative to smoking, tend to continue smoking. This results in them getting both the risks of the standard and the electronic cigarette. When both forms of tobacco are used, the chances of eventually establishing a chronic lung disease more than triple. ^[3]

In conclusion, electronic cigarettes are healthier than regular cigarettes in the sense of developing chronic lung diseases. Yet, most people who start using the electric variant, tend to keep smoking, which makes the impact on your lungs even worse. As in most cases, the saying “Prevention is better than cure”, applies here.

Wordcount:341 words without sources and the title

URL: https://tobaccovselectroniccigarettes.tech.blog

^[1]https://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(18)32278-5/abstract

^[2]https://www.nbcnews.com/health/vaping/e-cigarettes-linked-lung-problems-first-long-term-study-vaping-n1101641

^[3]https://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(19)30391-5/fulltext

It seems like everyone knows someone who suffers from infertility or who can’t have children because of an inheritable disease. Realizing that the possibility of seeing double lines on a pregnancy test is nearly impossible, may be one of the hardest things someone has to go through in their entire life. Women with mitochondrial diseases are part of those with fertility problems. Luckily, the first steps were set in enabling these women to get pregnant.

On the 6th of April 2017, the first baby with DNA from three different people was born using the mitochondrial replacement theory.^[1] This is an in vitro fertilization technique which allows women who suffer from a mitochondrial disease to have healthy children by replacing the faulty mitochondrial DNA with DNA from a donor. ^[2]

Why only women, you may ask? Well, in sexual reproduction an embryo only inherits mitochondria from its mother. These mitochondria have their own DNA that differs from nuclear DNA. Since mitochondria are responsible for producing energy in a cell, a mutation in one of these genes has a major effect on other organs. So, when a woman is a mitochondrial disease carrier or has it herself, the baby automatically inherits it too.

In theory, there are three methods for a procedure like this, but only one of them is approved: pronuclear transfer. This technique requires the fertilization of two eggs, one from the mother and one from a donor, with sperm of the father. Before the egg starts to evolve into an embryo, the donor’s nucleus is replaced by the mothers’ nucleus. However, since an embryo gets destructed during this method, this goes against a lot of people’s morals. ^[3]

This is why a different approach, called the spindle nuclear transfer technique, was introduced. Here the nucleus from the mother replaces the donor’s nucleus before fertilization with the father’s sperm. Five embryos were created using this technique, but only one of them developed normally. This embryo was implanted into the mother’s uterus and nine months later a healthy baby was born.^[4]

For safety measures, the baby’s mitochondria were tested for possible mitochondrial diseases. Luckily, less than 1 percent of mutated DNA was found. Yet, this does not preclude that the child should be monitored for the rest of its life.^[5]

The spindle nuclear transfer technique is wonderful in the sense that it gives women the chance to have children of their own without passing on a disease due to mutations in their mitochondria. However, since it’s still in its early stages, the long-term effects on the child are still unknown.

^[1]khttps://cbsebiology4u.wordpress.com/2017/04/15/two-women-one-man-and-a-baby-worlds-first-three-parent-baby/

^[2]https://www.nature.com/news/genetic-details-of-controversial-three-parent-baby-revealed-1.21761

^[3]https://www.newscientist.com/article/2107219-exclusive-worlds-first-baby-born-with-new-3-parent-technique/

^[4]https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212066116300345

^[5]https://www.newscientist.com/article/2096401-three-parent-babies-might-have-health-problems-in-later-life/

Wordcount: 432 words without the title and the sources