Blood Types

Although all blood is made of the same basic elements, not all blood is alike. In fact, there are eight different common blood types, which are determined by the presence or absence of certain antigens – substances that can trigger an immune response if they are foreign to the body. Since some antigens can trigger a patient's immune system to attack the transfused blood, safe blood transfusions depend on careful blood typing and cross-matching.
The ABO Blood Group System

There are four major blood groups determined by the presence or absence of two antigens – A and B – on the surface of red blood cells:

* Group A – has only the A antigen on red cells (and B antibody in the plasma)
* Group B – has only the B antigen on red cells (and A antibody in the plasma)
* Group AB – has both A and B antigens on red cells (but neither A nor B antibody in the plasma)
* Group O – has neither A nor B antigens on red cells (but both A and B antibody are in the plasma)


How is our blood type determined?

*It’s inherited. Like eye color, blood type is passed genetically from your parents. Whether your blood group is type A, B, AB or O is based on the blood types of your mother and father.



This chart shows the potential blood types you may inherit.

Trichonella spriralis

The parasite may be found in a wide variety of animals, including pigs, dogs, cats, rats, and many wild animals (such as fox, wolf, and polar bear). The disease is found only among those who eat pork, primarily in North America and Europe. Up to 5 percent of Americans have had an infestation, usually without symptoms. It is almost never a problem in countries such as France, where pigs eat root vegetables, not garbage.

Diversity of the tribes of Man

The Human Genome Project found all humans to have a 99.9 % similar genetic content and identity, but this is challenged by a new more detailed research suggesting a higher genetic diversity, with further medical and evolutionary implications.

Previous studies focused on analyzing polymorphism (variation) in DNA nucleotidic bases. But the new approach tackled deletions or duplications of code among relatively long sequences of individual DNA and then compared the so-called copy number variations (CNVs) across individuals from different human breeds. This method uncovered a complex, higher-order variation in the code and better explains why some populations or races are vulnerable to certain diseases and respond well to specific drugs, while counterparts
swiftly fall sick or never respond to treatment.

Two technical breakthroughs, a faster, accurate sequencing of DNA and a powerful software programme to spot the CNVs allowed the new approach. 1,447 CNVs were located in roughly 2,900 genes, which means around 12 % of the human DNA. “Each one of us has a unique pattern of gains and losses of complete sections of DNA,” said Matthew Hurles from Britain’s Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute. “One of the real surprises of these results was just how much of our DNA varies in copy number. We estimate this to be at least 12 % of the genome.”

“The copy number variation that researchers had seen before was simply the tip of the iceberg, while the bulk lay submerged, undetected. We now appreciate the immense contribution of this phenomenon to genetic differences between individuals.”

Some missing or duplicated DNA fragments are very large, thus CNVs might have a big impact on gene expression. About 16 % of genes related to disease have been found to possess CNVs, like those involved in the rare DiGeorge, Williams-Beuren and Prader-Willi syndromes or more common schizophrenia, cataracts, spinal muscular atrophy and atherosclerosis. But kidney disease, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s and vulnerability to malaria and the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), which recent research has blamed on single-letter variations in the gene code, are also suspected for CNVs. “The stage is set for global studies to explore anew… the clinical significance of human variation,” said Huntington Willard at Duke University in North Carolina.

The new data also shows that our species is so recent that the vast majority of CNVs, around 89 %, was found to be shared among the 269 people belonging to Mongoloid Race (Japanese and Chinese), African Negroid (Yoruba Nigerians) and Caucasoid (of Northern and Western European ancestry). But there are also widespread specific differences in CNVs according to the race and even inside the same race according to population (geographical origin). This means that over 200,000 years or so, natural selection favored subtle variants allowing different humans populations to adapt to their different environments, with specific climate, pathogens, and food resources.

Mitchondira Eve, Our common ancestor

Eve is important because there is a direct female line to her from all living humans. She is not our only common ancestor, nor is she our most recent. However, more recent ancestors are hard to date because of the mixing of the genes in sex.

What is Mitchondria RNA? Where are we from?

Like every other human, I came from Africa ultimately. But anthropologists have long known that early humans branched off as they left Africa and spread throughout the world. My particular lineage takes my ancestors out of Africa and through the Middle East. At this point, roughly 40,000 years ago several groups split off – one going south into India and eventually making its way to Australia, while another ends up in China.

During the scientific inqury class, I have had a chance to think where I am from with scientific evidences. I believe that I have strong faith to God. So, first time, when Dr, Rood tried to lead us to think about Mitchodria Eve, I felt akward. Also, he mentioned about Ameoba with Bacteria, I was really curious how to solve or tell about the theory.
So far, so Good. I mean, I like that he keeps giving a chance to think about the topic. According to the bible, Gen1:1, God creates the world.
I belive Christians specially, young students should know that clearly also with scientific thinking.

Deductive reasoning

In logic, we often refer to the two broad methods of reasoning as the deductive and inductive approaches.

Deductive reasoning works from the more general to the more specific. Sometimes this is informally called a "top-down" approach. We might begin with thinking up a theory about our topic of interest. We then narrow that down into more specific hypotheses that we can test. We narrow down even further when we collect observations to address the hypotheses. This ultimately leads us to be able to test the hypotheses with specific data -- a confirmation (or not) of our original theories.

Induction reasoning

Inductive reasoning works the other way, moving from specific observations to broader generalizations and theories. Informally, we sometimes call this a "bottom up" approach (please note that it's "bottom up" and not "bottoms up" which is the kind of thing the bartender says to customers when he's trying to close for the night!). In inductive reasoning, we begin with specific observations and measures, begin to detect patterns and regularities, formulate some tentative hypotheses that we can explore, and finally end up developing some general conclusions or theories.

These two methods of reasoning have a very different "feel" to them when you're conducting research. Inductive reasoning, by its very nature, is more open-ended and exploratory, especially at the beginning. Deductive reasoning is more narrow in nature and is concerned with testing or confirming hypotheses. Even though a particular study may look like it's purely deductive (e.g., an experiment designed to test the hypothesized effects of some treatment on some outcome), most social research involves both inductive and deductive reasoning processes at some time in the project. In fact, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that we could assemble the two graphs above into a single circular one that continually cycles from theories down to observations and back up again to theories. Even in the most constrained experiment, the researchers may observe patterns in the data that lead them to develop new theories.