Could a Neuroscientist Understand a Microprocessor?, bioRxiv, 2016-05-27

AbstractThere is a popular belief in neuroscience that we are primarily data limited, and that producing large, multimodal, and complex datasets will, with the help of advanced data analysis algorithms, lead to fundamental insights into the way the brain processes information. These datasets do not yet exist, and if they did we would have no way of evaluating whether or not the algorithmically-generated insights were sufficient or even correct. To address this, here we take a classical microprocessor as a model organism, and use our ability to perform arbitrary experiments on it to see if popular data analysis methods from neuroscience can elucidate the way it processes information. Microprocessors are among those artificial information processing systems that are both complex and that we understand at all levels, from the overall logical flow, via logical gates, to the dynamics of transistors. We show that the approaches reveal interesting structure in the data but do not meaningfully describe the hierarchy of information processing in the microprocessor. This suggests current analytic approaches in neuroscience may fall short of producing meaningful understanding of neural systems, regardless of the amount of data. Additionally, we argue for scientists using complex non-linear dynamical systems with known ground truth, such as the microprocessor as a validation platform for time-series and structure discovery methods.Author SummaryNeuroscience is held back by the fact that it is hard to evaluate if a conclusion is correct; the complexity of the systems under study and their experimental inaccessability make the assessment of algorithmic and data analytic technqiues challenging at best. We thus argue for testing approaches using known artifacts, where the correct interpretation is known. Here we present a microprocessor platform as one such test case. We find that many approaches in neuroscience, when used na•vely, fall short of producing a meaningful understanding.

Report of Partial Findings from the National Toxicology Program Carcinogenesis Studies of Cell Phone Radiofrequency Radiation in Hsd Sprague Dawley® Sd Rats (Whole Body Exposure), bioRxiv, 2016-05-27

AbstractThe U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) has carried out extensive rodent toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of radiofrequency radiation (RFR) at frequencies and modulations used in the U.S. telecommunications industry. This report presents partial findings from these studies. The occurrences of two tumor types in male Harlan Sprague Dawley rats exposed to RFR, malignant gliomas in the brain and schwannomas of the heart, were considered of particular interest and are the subject of this report. The findings in this report were reviewed by expert peer reviewers selected by the NTP and National Institutes of Health (NIH). These reviews and responses to comments are included as appendices to this report, and revisions to the current document have incorporated and addressed these comments. When the studies are completed, they will undergo additional peer review before publication in full as part of the NTP's Toxicology and Carcinogenesis Technical Reports Series. No portion of this work has been submitted for publication in a scientific journal. Supplemental information in the form of four additional manuscripts has or will soon be submitted for publication. These manuscripts describe in detail the designs and performance of the RFR exposure system, the dosimetry of RFR exposures in rats and mice, the results to a series of pilot studies establishing the ability of the animals to thermoregulate during RFR exposures, and studies of DNA damage. (1) Capstick M, Kuster N, Kuhn S, Berdinas-Torres V, Wilson P, Ladbury J, Koepke G, McCormick D, Gauger J, and Melnick R. A radio frequency radiation reverberation chamber exposure system for rodents; (2) Yijian G, Capstick M, McCormick D, Gauger J, Horn T, Wilson P, Melnick RL, and Kuster N. Life time dosimetric assessment for mice and rats exposed to cell phone radiation; (3) Wyde ME, Horn TL, Capstick M, Ladbury J, Koepke G, Wilson P, Stout MD, Kuster N, Melnick R, Bucher JR, and McCormick D. Pilot studies of the National Toxicology Program’s cell phone radiofrequency radiation reverberation chamber exposure system; (4) Smith-Roe SL, Wyde ME, Stout MD, Winters J, Hobbs CA, Shepard KG, Green A, Kissling GE, Tice RR, Bucher JR, and Witt KL. Evaluation of the genotoxicity of cell phone radiofrequency radiation in male and female rats and mice following subchronic exposure.SUMMARYThe purpose of this communication is to report partial findings from a series of radiofrequency radiation (RFR) cancer studies in rats performed under the auspices of the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP).1 This report contains peer-reviewed, neoplastic and hyperplastic findings only in the brain and heart of HsdSprague Dawley® SD® (HSD) rats exposed to RFR starting in utero and continuing throughout their lifetimes. These studies found low incidences of malignant gliomas in the brain and schwannomas in the heart of male rats exposed to RFR of the two types [Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) and Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM)] currently used in U.S. wireless networks. Potentially preneoplastic lesions were also observed in the brain and heart of male rats exposed to RFR.The review of partial study data in this report has been prompted by several factors. Given the widespread global usage of mobile communications among users of all ages, even a very small increase in the incidence of disease resulting from exposure to RFR could have broad implications for public health. There is a high level of public and media interest regarding the safety of cell phone RFR and the specific results of these NTP studies. Lastly, the tumors in the brain and heart observed at low incidence in male rats exposed to GSM-and CDMA-modulated cell phone RFR in this study are of a type similar to tumors observed in some epidemiology studies of cell phone use. These findings appear to support the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) conclusions regarding the possible carcinogenic potential of RFR.2It is important to note that this document reviews only the findings from the brain and heart and is not a complete report of all findings from the NTP’s studies. Additional data from these studies in HsdSprague Dawley® SD® (Harlan) rats and similar studies conducted in B6C3F1N mice are currently under evaluation and will be reported together with the current findings in two forthcoming NTP Technical Reports.

Revised estimates for the number of human and bacteria cells in the body, bioRxiv, 2016-01-07

We critically revisit the ″common knowledge″ that bacteria outnumber human cells by a ratio of at least 101 in the human body. We found the total number of bacteria in the ″reference man″ to be 3.9·1013, with an uncertainty (SEM) of 25%, and a variation over the population (CV) of 52%. For human cells we identify the dominant role of the hematopoietic lineage to the total count of body cells (≈90%), and revise past estimates to reach a total of 3.0·1013human cells in the 70 kg ″reference man″ with 2% uncertainty and 14% CV. Our analysis updates the widely-cited 101 ratio, showing that the number of bacteria in our bodies is actually of the same order as the number of human cells. Indeed, the numbers are similar enough that each defecation event may flip the ratio to favor human cells over bacteria.

Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies, Nature Genetics, 2015-05-18