Archive for the 'Weapons & Toxins' Category

I picked up an old issue of the New England Journal of Medicine and came across a couple of interesting picture stories. The first was on a serious HF accident (free access). The poor victim was cleaning an old facility used for glass etching when a pipe containing 70% HF burst on him. The treatment involved pumping Mg²⁺ and Ca²⁺ into his veins and arteries.  You can actually see the calcified precipitates on his skin. Yum: 

The second pict-o-story was based on a tub of fluorescent urine.  When admitted to the ER, the urinator was believed to have ingested anti-freeze.  The doctors noted that the patient’s pee fluoresced under UV light, and they concluded that this was probably the result of the anti-freeze’s being spiked with dye.  The wording of the paper made it seem like the doctors suspected the chromaphore was fluorescein, which is often added to anti-freeze to aid in the detection of radiator leaks.

The only problem is that the fluorescence was blue, not green, which is the color you’d expect from fluorescein.  Some other guys noticed the same thing and sent a letter to the editor, so who knows what’s going on?  In their defense, the doctors noted that there are plenty of opportunities for false negatives and false positives if this were to actually be used as a test for anti-freeze ingestion, so it appears the only reason this story was published was as an excuse to run a pretty picture of glowing urine.  I can respect that.

Lastly, I should add that both of the patients survived and apologize for ruining your appetites.

Whether you like it or not, one of the principal reasons the government supports scientific research is to strengthen our ability to wage war. Scientific discoveries often open avenues for new and improved weapons, and making sure that our military technology is the most advanced in the world is vital to our national security. While military power alone is not a sufficient condition for maintaining our superpower status, it is a necessary condition. Part of our job as scientists is to use our knowledge to ensure that the “good guys” have the most advanced technology in the world when it comes to efficiently killing humans. Yes, this thought is a little revolting, but having scientists collaborate with the military is one of the best ways to ensure the protection of our political and social ideals.

The announcement that the US will begin developing a new model of nuclear warhead seemed to completely bypass the major news outlets. At least, no one made a fuss about it. I don’t know how much of an improvement the new design is over the old one, but it seems that the change is oriented more toward safer handling than greater yields.  That said, I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s more to the story.  I don’t expect the Army to go around advertising what exactly they’re hoping to accomplish. Congress needs to know, but that can be done behind closed doors. Suffice it to say, if the leap is significant, I think that the money used to fund the project would be money well spent. It will be interesting to see what Congress has to say when hearings open this month.

I’ve always wondered where the US stands in terms of the active development of chemical weapons. I know the Army has publicized the fact that it’s trying to destroy large portions of its stockpile, but it probably doesn’t want anyone to know whether it’s researching ways to create more potent chemical weapons.  Whether for tactical or strategic purposes, I simply presume that in some secret lab, the government continues to sponsor research on lethal chemistry.

And that’s a good thing. Do you think the bad guys wouldn’t use a powerful chemical weapon if they had access to it? No way. In both times of war and of peace, we should constantly challenge ourselves to develop new and improved chemical and biological weapons so that: 1) they are available if we need them and 2) we can develop effective counterweapons in case the enemy makes them first. Saying that the development of weapons of mass destruction is wrong and pursuing a strategy of self-imposed ignorance will solve nothing. We can’t afford to let our enemies seize the initiative on any of these fronts.

If you don’t want to participate, that’s understandable—I personally wouldn’t like testing compounds on mice all day—but be glad (as I am) that there are people who have decided to work in these areas.