This Slate article about a supposed phenomenon known as ASMR is a few months old but it's still an interesting subject*. ASMR, or the Autonomous Sensory Meridian Response** is a rather general term for a collection of subtle but pleasurable psychological and physical reactions to what appears to be gentle or indirect stimuli. It can reportedly be triggered by gentle whispering, light touching, or even just the implication of receiving care from another person. Crinkling food wrappers, sorting silverware, or examining groceries also seem to produce ASMR for some individuals.
I don't experience this phenomenon. I generally remain skeptical about unexplained phenomena, too, especially when they're endemic to the Internet. Despite my skepticism I can't help but wonder if ASMR is really just a way to collectively codify a set of real psychological phenomena previously considered too minor to observe or too difficult to quantify. Everyday life is rich in dull but enjoyable moments. Perhaps mass communication just offers them in a more concentrated format, much like it does with news. Information overload is a real issue, too, if not a psychological one. It's the result of an inability to distinguish signal from noise; perhaps ASMR is pleasurable because it requires observation of a small signal (like Bob Ross' whispered instructions, for instance) in a low-noise background. It's relaxing because there isn't a lot of stimulus competing for the recipient's attention but it's stimulating because it's direct.
What's considered ASMR may truly be a collection of phenomena all related to the same set of primarily audiovisual stimuli. I think it's safe to suggest that the limbic system is involved and that much of the reaction is subconscious. It's reported to be not quite but almost orgasmic, much like yawning or sneezing are sometimes described. The Slate article above also suggests some potentially Freudian parent-child reaction but I think that may just be confirmation bias; Youtube participation may skew toward female users.
It would be interesting to see what range of stimuli repeatedly produce ASMRs in those who feel them. Do gently-worded threats do it? What about calming medical interviews in foreign languages?
*This sentence originally ended "...but it's been making the rounds again." That's how the last entry begins and it's kind of an embarrassing phrase to use anyway. Calling attention to it kinda defeats the purpose of editing but now it's not redundant, at least.
**It's really kind of a curious name for the phenomena. I'd generally expect unexplained psychological responses to acquire more pseudo-scholastic and less clinical names, i.e. Morgellons. Perhaps that's one distinction between a pleasurable unexplained phenomenon and a collective delusion.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Sunday, April 21, 2013
Hunka burnin' love
There's a web game called No One Has To Die that's been making the gaming-blog rounds. I don't intend this to be a gaming blog per se but this particular game is really quite good. Without giving too much away, it an excellent example of how even the smallest dose of interactivity can turn a fairly average story into a multifaceted one by virtue of player choice. The venerable Choose Your Own Adventure books did that too, of course, but aren't those really games, too? Either way, No One Has To Die isn't even that much more fun than flipping around a paperback to avoid the "bad" endings, but in this case it's clearly intentional. Perhaps most games can be reduced to repeating different permutations of the same actions until the desired result is reached.
Friday, April 19, 2013
As cheap as free?
It now costs about $3000 to $5000 to sequence a human genome. That cost is 10,000x less than the same effort had required just 10 years ago. Obviously we can't get the technology to be much cheaper, right? The sequencing machinery itself is growing cheaper: as of last year, a decent next-generation sequencer could be purchased for $80,000 to $120,000 or so, down from half-million dollar models from just a few years ago. The limiting factor here may be how the machines are intended for research purposes. A well-funded lab can certainly afford to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a single machine, to say nothing of the reagents required to actually get data out of it.
Ubiquitous DNA sequencing has the potential to upend nearly everything we know about personalized medicine, but only if it's not cost-prohibitive. Basic molecular biological techniques certainly have applications in clinical or diagnostic environments. Sequencing could really go beyond that and become relevant to everyday folks. It could just be a matter of having a streamlined, automated system, with samples sent elsewhere. A recent start-up called uBiome offers to characterize the microbiome of just about anything you'd like for less than $100. They aren't specific about how they got their costs so low, but I'm assuming they're just doing the usual 16S rRNA amplification and some quick next-gen sequencing. That's one way to create demand for incredibly cheap sequencing technologies.
Let's wax futurist about the potential of super-cheap, publicly-available nucleotide sequencing:
Ubiquitous DNA sequencing has the potential to upend nearly everything we know about personalized medicine, but only if it's not cost-prohibitive. Basic molecular biological techniques certainly have applications in clinical or diagnostic environments. Sequencing could really go beyond that and become relevant to everyday folks. It could just be a matter of having a streamlined, automated system, with samples sent elsewhere. A recent start-up called uBiome offers to characterize the microbiome of just about anything you'd like for less than $100. They aren't specific about how they got their costs so low, but I'm assuming they're just doing the usual 16S rRNA amplification and some quick next-gen sequencing. That's one way to create demand for incredibly cheap sequencing technologies.
Let's wax futurist about the potential of super-cheap, publicly-available nucleotide sequencing:
- Breakfast cereal manufacturers can offer free microbiome sequencing in every box of Cap'n Bran Flakes to show how their product might contribute to a healthy gut.
- Vending machines can offer genome screening on demand to screen for potential genetic maladies (but do people ever use those drugstore blood pressure screening machines? Are they secretly some kind of Scientologist apparatus?)
- Speaking of drugstores, pharmacies could do quick screens for genetic predisposition to adverse drug reactions before they actually dispense said drugs.
- Labs could spend money on more practical things, like this electronic ice bucket. Oh yeah.
Monday, April 15, 2013
Virulence Factors is the punk band that never was*
It seems like every time I hit up Google for a quick answer to a science question I find a new database. In this case, the question was "does the Vibrio pathogenicity island produce an infective phage particle on its own?" It's really just a question best answered by a review article rather than a database, but I found a nice map of the pathogenicity island in question. Very helpful, plus this VFDB site may be helpful in the future despite, sadly, appearing inactive since 2008.**
*Virulence Factor is apparently a band from Chicago. They're kind of Evanescence-metal.Unlike the above database, Virulence Factor remains active.
**Oh, wait, no! There's a new version of VFDB.
*Virulence Factor is apparently a band from Chicago. They're kind of Evanescence-metal.
**Oh, wait, no! There's a new version of VFDB.
Thursday, April 11, 2013
A membrane protein specific to Staph?
So I was poking around in some gene orthology databases and found a family of uncharacterized proteins conserved in Staphylococcus. It's at least in S. aureus COL. Though the protein family is largely undescribed, some annotations seem to suggest it's a M50B family metalloendopeptidase.
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Pretty pictures
No radiation, but it is diatomic |
The image is from Anne Weston of the London Research Institute of Cancer Research UK and is a 2012 Wellcome Image Award winner.
Sunday, April 07, 2013
Babies on strike
Found while looking for tuberculosis-related public health posters:
This is a poster from the Library of Congress archives. Perhaps babies just aren't well-organized.
Infants Local 23 |
Saturday, April 06, 2013
Here's a pretty neat example of technological time travel: media preservation folks at Indiana University found gramophone records printed into books from the late 19th century. The records aren't solid media. They're just ink-based reproductions of the grooves found on records. From these grooves we can produce waveform images and from the images we can produce audio. The original authors of these reproduced records explicitly intended their work to be accessible in the future, though they clearly didn't foresee technology like scanners or audio editing software.
There are other, earlier examples of hand-engraved waveforms. Here's one from 1806, mentioned in the link above but looped by me just for fun:
There are other, earlier examples of hand-engraved waveforms. Here's one from 1806, mentioned in the link above but looped by me just for fun:
Thursday, April 04, 2013
I listened to this TED talk by Allan Savory today. TED talks are usually rich in big ideas and poor in specifics. This one is certainly no exception. Even so, it illustrates one potential example of an established phenomenon proving to be somewhat less than the absolute truth.
Savory explains how global climate change isn't just due to an overabundance of burning carbon sources. It's also due to rampant desertification. Many former grasslands have, over the course of the last century or so, lost most of their natural plant life and groundcover, exposing the soil to the elements and increasing water loss by evaporation. The area no longer serves as carbon storage. Savory proposes that the only solution (and here's where I start to get skeptical, at least due to his claims of the "only solution") is to mimic the effects of natural animal movement patterns with livestock. Large herds of cattle usually don't stay in one place for long: they graze for a while and move on to the proverbial greener pastures. Some success has been had in planning the grazing patterns of domestic livestock such that they keep moving through arid areas and stimulate plant growth rather than just consuming it all. The improved plant growth should prevent or even reverse large swaths of desert and allow for enough carbon storage to reduce atmospheric carbon to pre-industrial levels.
It would be nice to think that reversing carbon-based climate change is as easy as shuffling around livestock. I worry about how well the theory scales up; what assumptions are being made about how much desert land can really be reverted to grassland? Do these plans require more livestock than we currently have? What's the potential impact on methane levels? Allan Savory has been talking about holistic resource management for decades, but some actual models of its potential impact on climate change would be nice to see. I presume they exist somewhere. (There's plenty of climate-bloggery about Savory's hypotheses out there but much of it looks less than open-minded.)
Savory explains how global climate change isn't just due to an overabundance of burning carbon sources. It's also due to rampant desertification. Many former grasslands have, over the course of the last century or so, lost most of their natural plant life and groundcover, exposing the soil to the elements and increasing water loss by evaporation. The area no longer serves as carbon storage. Savory proposes that the only solution (and here's where I start to get skeptical, at least due to his claims of the "only solution") is to mimic the effects of natural animal movement patterns with livestock. Large herds of cattle usually don't stay in one place for long: they graze for a while and move on to the proverbial greener pastures. Some success has been had in planning the grazing patterns of domestic livestock such that they keep moving through arid areas and stimulate plant growth rather than just consuming it all. The improved plant growth should prevent or even reverse large swaths of desert and allow for enough carbon storage to reduce atmospheric carbon to pre-industrial levels.
It would be nice to think that reversing carbon-based climate change is as easy as shuffling around livestock. I worry about how well the theory scales up; what assumptions are being made about how much desert land can really be reverted to grassland? Do these plans require more livestock than we currently have? What's the potential impact on methane levels? Allan Savory has been talking about holistic resource management for decades, but some actual models of its potential impact on climate change would be nice to see. I presume they exist somewhere. (There's plenty of climate-bloggery about Savory's hypotheses out there but much of it looks less than open-minded.)
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)