The movie has problems no doubt. The studio forcing them to throw out the practical effects for CGI was and still is an idiotic decision. There's some bad CGI stuff in here. And I do think the script could've used a few more drafts because the characters are not as memorable as the first one and when some of them die you don't get the same impact. Other than that I love the movie. The horror elements are outstanding in my opinion. It's not a jump scare-fest. The director carefully works in the scares and it's clever. I like the performances from everyone. I thought Mary Elizabeth Winstead was a great lead and everyone played great parts. The nods to the Carpenter film are outstanding and I love that they didn't just rip off the blood test scene from the original and came up with their own testing scene. The number one thing I love about this movie is that The Thing evolves throughout this movie. No reviewers or fans bring this up. When they first find The Thing it's a wild creature and then as the movie evolves the creature gets smarter and starts evolving into the thing we see in the carpenter version. I love how they set everything up in this prequel to match the actual Carptenter film.

Milestone: Commercially viable cure for cancer Year 4/12 - post 4/10

#1 We took Covid and made it kill cancer....and everything else.

#2 Commercially viable cure for cancer 1/10 - We saw all the cancer and we like...thats a bit hard

#3 My name is Legion, for we are many

------

December, 2029 - VaccineGaveMe5G.org blog #277

The Australian National Institute of Cancer Prevention and Research (ANICPR) has today released its annual report. Following the delays of last year, this year the report was submitted on time and with a number of security clearances required for members of parliament to access certain chapters. While large sections of the report are available for public consumption, there is several updates to previous report chapters that are now classified as internal sensitive. The media has been informed those redacted sections relate to private medial information of cancer patients across the country. There is also a number of updated persons involved with the Legion membership who have requested their names be removed. I have included the most important updates below.

Personally I think those redacted sections are covering up THE TRUTH!

We all know this program is just a further attempt to indoctrinate our children in Chinese propaganda by PM Wong!

It's time to wake up Avaxnation!

Legion Members

• People's Republic of China - Peking Union Medical College, Fosun Pharmaceutical Company, and Beijing Genomics Institute
• Sweden - AstraZeneca
• United States - Harvard Medical, Johnson & Johnson and Pfizer
• United Kingdom
• Private Investor Group - Mining for Medicine, Claws Out!, and Cure2040.

The chinese investor list is particularly important because it was released first by yours truly here at Avaxnation! Only after I had revealed the list was it presented in the report! Cooincidence? I think not! Also Cure2040 has links to Scientology Australia, and the estate of Clive Palmer! Watch this space nation.

Directed Evolution or Attenuation

I'm going to get a little science on you here nation. Basically the ANICPR scientists this year spent twelve months trying to work out which pat

Journal of the American Chemical SocietyDOI: 10.1021/jacs.1c03194

Richard L. Redman and Isaac J. Krauss

https://ift.tt/3w5T2xn

What do these smooth paths mean?

So pretty much I have a younger cousin (about 16 or so) who lives in an evangelical household. Some of the beliefs his parents have are as follows:

• Genesis is literal through and through
• Earth is only 10,000 years old at best
• Halloween is a demonic holiday etc etc
• Some other conservative/evangelical beliefs

So my cousin has spoken out against some of these beliefs and usually the parents’ arguments are:

1. You are letting human intellect move you further away from God. No human is smarter than God.
2. It is better to be thought as incorrect by scientists on this earth than to be incorrect in God’s eyes.
3. They also use the really bad, “where you there?” argument.
4. Evolution hasn’t been proven actually.

So what advice/Bible verses/ historical facts would you give to my younger cousin regarding how to defend his “radical” beliefs? He’s especially annoyed by his parent’s comment that believing in evolution is “letting human intellect get in the way”, since he is a Christian himself.

Catechols are capable of diverse interactions with metals, radical chemistry, the ability to form redox-mediated crosslinks, and play an important role in many biological polymers. Genetic tools are presented that enable site-specific incorporation of the catechol amino acid 3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (L-DOPA) into proteins in bacteria, and a new DOPA-specific fluorescent biosensor for monitoring incorporation in living cells.

Abstract

The catechol group of 3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (L-DOPA) derived from L-tyrosine oxidation is a key post-translational modification (PTM) in many protein biomaterials and has potential as a bioorthogonal handle for precision protein conjugation applications such as antibody–drug conjugates. Despite this potential, indiscriminate enzymatic modification of exposed tyrosine residues or complete replacement of tyrosine using auxotrophic hosts remains the preferred method of introducing the catechol moiety into proteins, which precludes many protein engineering applications. We have developed new orthogonal translation machinery to site-specifically incorporate L-DOPA into recombinant proteins and a new fluorescent biosensor to selectively monitor L-DOPA incorporation in vivo. We show simultaneous biosynthesis and incorporation of L-DOPA and apply this translation machinery to engineer a novel metalloprotein containing a DOPA-Fe chromophore.

https://ift.tt/3amUgLY

Hi Reddit,

We are graduate students and postdocs in Professor Frances Arnold's research group at Caltech. We use directed evolution, the algorithm for which Frances won the Nobel Prize last week, as a tool to engineer proteins.

Directed evolution, like Darwinian evolution, is about "survival of the fittest" by selecting beneficial mutations that enhance a desired function. The key difference is that in directed evolution the person running the experiment chooses which mutations are beneficial – in other words, we choose the definition of "fittest" in "survival of the fittest."

Understanding how a protein's sequence connects to its structure is challenging (relevant XKCD), and understanding how that structure confers function is another significant challenge. A strength of directed evolution is that one does not need to know a lot about the protein to use it; all one needs is the genetic information (the DNA that encodes the protein of interest) and a way of testing each variant for the function of interest. We don't need to know exactly how or why the protein is able to catalyze a reaction or understand why a mutation enhances that activity.

Proteins have been engineered using directed evolution for myriad uses, from higher stability for use in your laundry detergent to remove stains to producing blockbuster pharmaceutical compounds in place of less environmentally friendly syntheses.

Unfortunately Frances is not able to join us for the discussion, but we are happy to answer any questions you have about directed evolution, proteins, Caltech, and beyond!

Useful links on directed evolution:

• “What is directed evolution and why did it win the chemistry Nobel prize?” from Chemistry World

• C&EN Online explanation of directed evolution and phage display

• Frances discussing the Nobel Prize on NPR’s Science Friday

• TEDxUSC talk by Frances: "Sex, Evolution, and Innovation"

Learn more about the Arnold Group: http://fhalab.caltech.edu/

Follow Dr. Arnold on Twitter: https://twitter.com/francesarnold

**Our discussion pan

Sorry if the title is confusing.

Random mutation combined with natural selection is an important part of how evolution has taken shape.

To my understanding it has also been shown that through the epigenome that environmental pressures can also switch genes on and off, altering how evolution has taken shape as well.

My question is, to what degree do each of these drivers define what everything looks like today? Is it all very dependent on reproduction (natural selection) or has the environment played a bigger role in our design?

If there was no natural selection involved, and only environmental pressures and random mutation mattered, would we have evolved along similar paths anyhow?

Evolution is essential to the appearance of complexity and ultimately Life. It relies on the propagation of the properties, traits and characteristics that allow an organism to survive in a challenging environment. It is evolution that shaped our world over about four billion years by slow and iterative adaptation. While natural evolution based on selection is slow and gradual, directed evolution allows the fast and streamlined optimization of a phenotype under selective conditions. The potential of directed evolution for the discovery and optimization of enzymes is mostly limited by the throughput of the tools and methods available for screening. Over the past twenty years, versatile tools based on droplet microfluidics have been developed to address the need for higher throughput. In this review, we provide a chronological overview of the intertwined development of microfluidics droplet‐based compartmentalization methods and in vivo directed evolution of enzymes.

https://ift.tt/3rr9a9O

The catechol group of 3,4‐dihydroxyphenylalanine (L‐DOPA) derived from L‐tyrosine oxidation is a key post‐translational modification (PTM) in many protein biomaterials and has potential as a bioorthogonal handle for precision protein conjugation applications such as antibody‐drug conjugates. Despite this potential, indiscriminate enzymatic modification of exposed tyrosine residues or complete replacement of tyrosine using auxotrophic hosts remains the preferred method of introducing the catechol moiety into proteins, which precludes many protein engineering applications. We have developed new orthogonal translation machinery to site‐specifically incorporate L‐DOPA into recombinant proteins and a new fluorescent biosensor to selectively monitor L‐DOPA incorporation in vivo. We show simultaneous biosynthesis and incorporation of L‐DOPA and apply this translation machinery to engineer a novel metalloprotein containing a DOPA‐Fe chromophore.

https://ift.tt/3amUgLY