Science

It might seem like a space-age fantasy, but there will be a lot of a serious talk in Seattle this weekend about a “space elevator.”You might think of it as a space railroad. In theory, the technology could make going into orbit as cheap and easy as buying a first-class airline ticket.The idea calls for a cable that stretches from a spot on the equator out to an anchor orbiting thousands of miles in space. On that cable, a remote-controlled cabin or elevator zips up and down.“That thing just takes off. Zoom – it just accelerates up that cable … really fast," says David Horn, organizer for America’s tenth annual space elevator meeting, held this weekend at the Museum of Flight. A few years ago, a company from Kent tested a model elevator, using a cable that went from the ground to a helicopter, hovering a kilometer above the ground.“You could barely see it, and you couldn’t even hear it up that high. And there was just this cable was disappearing … so it gave you an idea of what this would look like in the future. You would see a cable start up, and then you couldn’t really see it any more.”Nearly all the Space Elevator Conference meetings have been in Redmond or Seattle. Microsoft is a main sponsor, along with the International Space Elevator Consortium, and some key volunteers live in the area.This animation shows one of the leading ideas for how it would work http://youtu.be/_-XoafyJ9K4The concept of a space elevator has been around for decades. The physics is all worked out. They’re already testing ways to propel it from Earth into the sky (the test using the helicopter was to demonstrate how well a high-powered laser could beam energy to the robotic elevator cabin).Inventing a magical fiberBut it’s stymied by one simple problem – the cable itself. It has to be as light as a feather and strong as steel, or it’ll fall down. People have ideas for this – using carbon nanotechnology. But nobody has been able to make carbon nanotubes into a cable.“I feel absolutely confident that this material is going to be developed,” says Michael Laine, who spent much of the past decade investing nearly $2 million of his own money into a space elevator company called Liftport. It could be next year, or it could be in 50 years, he says.“I made the mistake about trying to put a timeline on it, and you cant do that. You cant forecast a breakthrough.”Why the moon might be better for an elevatorLaine has resurrected Liftport, and he and his buddies have a new idea – build a space elevator on the moon. It could use existing Kevlar or Xylon, because the moon’s gravity is so much weaker. They say it would make it landing on the moon about as easy as putting a satellite into orbit today. The same rockets that routinely put satellites into orbit could instead just dock to the elevator, unload their cargo, and it would swoop over to the moon.If that happened, Laine predicts you could have astronauts on the moon every month, from every country that launches satellites.Liftport is still more of an idea than a company. Laine’s trying to raise $8,000 online through Kickstarter.The space elevator meeting, at the Museum of Flight, includes family events for the public on Saturday.Related stories from KPLU: Space elevator passes first test Local company wants to build a space elevator

One of public radios most creative storytelling teams is in Seattle this weekend – turning radio into a live theater performance.Radiolab calls itself a show about curiosity. KPLU science reporter Keith Seinfeld talked with the show’s two hosts about how they make science come alive, and then turn it into live theater.(Listen to the interview ... and for serious Jad & Robert fans, we've added an extra 3 minute excerpt that didn't fit into the edited interview.)(For information about the shows on Friday and Saturday, visit the KPLU calendar page.)

One of public radios most creative storytelling teams is in Seattle this weekend – turning radio into a live theater performance.Radiolab calls itself a show about curiosity. KPLU science reporter Keith Seinfeld talked with the show’s two hosts about how they make science come alive, and then turn it into live theater.(Listen to the interview ... and for serious Jad & Robert fans, we've added an extra 3 minute excerpt that didn't fit into the edited interview.)(For information about the shows on Friday and Saturday, visit the KPLU calendar page.)

One of public radios most creative storytelling teams is in Seattle this weekend – turning radio into a live theater performance.Radiolab calls itself a show about curiosity. KPLU science reporter Keith Seinfeld talked with the show’s two hosts about how they make science come alive, and then turn it into live theater.(Listen to the interview ... and for serious Jad & Robert fans, we've added an extra 3 minute excerpt that didn't fit into the edited interview.)(For information about the shows on Friday and Saturday, visit the KPLU calendar page.)

It turns out humans and cattle have some of the same fertility issues.Researchers at Washington State University have received more than a million dollars from the National Institutes of Health to look into what causes lost pregnancies in beef cattle - and also what that can teach us about miscarriages in humans.It turns out that cattle and humans have the same basic problem, says WSU Assistant Professor, Holly Neiberg.  Both species tend to miscarry about a third of the time within the first two to three weeks after insemination. Neiberg is a geneticist.“I think the general public probably doesn’t appreciate how similar a lot of mammalian species are to one another. Obviously, every species has differences, but we also have a lot of commonality. ” The hormonal cycles of cattle and humans are similar, she says. We also tend to have twins at about the same rate as we age. And a cow’s gestation, though about a month longer than humans’, is close enough that scientists can use cattle to learn about human physiology.For this round of funding, Neiberg and two other research biologists – one at WSU and another at the USDA in Montana – have narrowed the issue to problems with the cows’ uterus, not environmental factors. Another study will look at the viability of eggs. A key focus is on the critical phase of pregnancy when a fetus should attach to the uterine wall. They’re looking for genetic markers that indicate fertility.“So, we’re trying to understand the mechanism of how cows become infertile, so that we can have more healthy cows that are fertile without having to use medications or drugs or things like that.”In case you’re wondering, she says this is not genetic engineering. It’s the kind of breeding that’s been done for centuries on all kinds of domesticated animals.Eventually, the researchers hope to help ranchers select for cows that are the most productive, despite some stressors –for example, those that can keep a pregnancy even when they’re lactating. Their results could help save ranchers thousands of dollars on livestock that isn’t reproducing well.And they could help a lot of people avoid the heartbreak and expense of fertility treatments and high rates of miscarriage.The funding for this five-year-study comes from the relatively new Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.For more background on human infertility, here’s an article from the New York Times Magazine in November 2008 about one writer's “broken uterus” and how she hired a surrogate to bear children for her.

It turns out humans and cattle have some of the same fertility issues.Researchers at Washington State University have received more than a million dollars from the National Institutes of Health to look into what causes lost pregnancies in beef cattle - and also what that can teach us about miscarriages in humans.It turns out that cattle and humans have the same basic problem, says WSU Assistant Professor, Holly Neiberg.  Both species tend to miscarry about a third of the time within the first two to three weeks after insemination. Neiberg is a geneticist.“I think the general public probably doesn’t appreciate how similar a lot of mammalian species are to one another. Obviously, every species has differences, but we also have a lot of commonality. ” The hormonal cycles of cattle and humans are similar, she says. We also tend to have twins at about the same rate as we age. And a cow’s gestation, though about a month longer than humans’, is close enough that scientists can use cattle to learn about human physiology.For this round of funding, Neiberg and two other research biologists – one at WSU and another at the USDA in Montana – have narrowed the issue to problems with the cows’ uterus, not environmental factors. Another study will look at the viability of eggs. A key focus is on the critical phase of pregnancy when a fetus should attach to the uterine wall. They’re looking for genetic markers that indicate fertility.“So, we’re trying to understand the mechanism of how cows become infertile, so that we can have more healthy cows that are fertile without having to use medications or drugs or things like that.”In case you’re wondering, she says this is not genetic engineering. It’s the kind of breeding that’s been done for centuries on all kinds of domesticated animals.Eventually, the researchers hope to help ranchers select for cows that are the most productive, despite some stressors –for example, those that can keep a pregnancy even when they’re lactating. Their results could help save ranchers thousands of dollars on livestock that isn’t reproducing well.And they could help a lot of people avoid the heartbreak and expense of fertility treatments and high rates of miscarriage.The funding for this five-year-study comes from the relatively new Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.For more background on human infertility, here’s an article from the New York Times Magazine in November 2008 about one writer's “broken uterus” and how she hired a surrogate to bear children for her.

It turns out humans and cattle have some of the same fertility issues.Researchers at Washington State University have received more than a million dollars from the National Institutes of Health to look into what causes lost pregnancies in beef cattle - and also what that can teach us about miscarriages in humans.It turns out that cattle and humans have the same basic problem, says WSU Assistant Professor, Holly Neiberg.  Both species tend to miscarry about a third of the time within the first two to three weeks after insemination. Neiberg is a geneticist.“I think the general public probably doesn’t appreciate how similar a lot of mammalian species are to one another. Obviously, every species has differences, but we also have a lot of commonality. ” The hormonal cycles of cattle and humans are similar, she says. We also tend to have twins at about the same rate as we age. And a cow’s gestation, though about a month longer than humans’, is close enough that scientists can use cattle to learn about human physiology.For this round of funding, Neiberg and two other research biologists – one at WSU and another at the USDA in Montana – have narrowed the issue to problems with the cows’ uterus, not environmental factors. Another study will look at the viability of eggs. A key focus is on the critical phase of pregnancy when a fetus should attach to the uterine wall. They’re looking for genetic markers that indicate fertility.“So, we’re trying to understand the mechanism of how cows become infertile, so that we can have more healthy cows that are fertile without having to use medications or drugs or things like that.”In case you’re wondering, she says this is not genetic engineering. It’s the kind of breeding that’s been done for centuries on all kinds of domesticated animals.Eventually, the researchers hope to help ranchers select for cows that are the most productive, despite some stressors –for example, those that can keep a pregnancy even when they’re lactating. Their results could help save ranchers thousands of dollars on livestock that isn’t reproducing well.And they could help a lot of people avoid the heartbreak and expense of fertility treatments and high rates of miscarriage.The funding for this five-year-study comes from the relatively new Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.For more background on human infertility, here’s an article from the New York Times Magazine in November 2008 about one writer's “broken uterus” and how she hired a surrogate to bear children for her.

You might have trouble finding any attractive vegetables or fruits if you shop in the wrong stores. It’s especially challenging in poor neighborhoods, where mini-marts packed with beer, cigarettes and junk food may be all you can find.One solution to be tested in Seattle this month will be in the form of a healthy corner store. Call it a mini-grocery.And in this case, "mini" truly means very small. It started out inside a single shipping container. The first version was plopped down in a parking lot, like an espresso stand.Now,  it’s evolved into a tiny storefront. It's called "Stockbox Grocery," in the South Park neighborhood, on Seattle’s industrial southern edge. Co-owner Carrie Ferrence says it’s a different niche than a super-market."There's a lot of potential for us to reimagine what a grocery store is," says Ferrence.Her model is the old-fashioned corner store, before they all became convenience stores. And she says the economics pencil out, because of the low overhead on a store thats one-tenth the size of a typical grocery store."When we go to grocery we often buy the same five and ten items, every single week -- milk, bread,  dairy, meat and produce. And those are the items that go bad the most frequently and are really the most important part of our food staple system," she says.Stockbox shelves will be stocked with perishables. The first thing you'll see is a big produce display. Plus, they will stock a few snacks -- fruit leather for kids, wine for adults, and ice cream for everyone.One of the biggest public health challenges today – maybe the biggest -- is getting people to eat more produce, and less sugary or processed stuff. And if those basics are hard to get, you get out of the habit of buying and eating them. Community groups suggested one other category, she says:"Basic grab and go options -- sandwiches, salads, burritos, things that are packed full of vegetables and protein."Those will serve the lunch time crowd along busy 14th Avenue, at the foot of the South Park Bridge.Stockbox is a for-profit company, trying to prove healthy foods can survive without public subsidies in poor neighborhoods. They did get startup assistance from King County, in the form of an $11,700 grant and connections to a lender.That was a tiny part of a two-year federal stimulus grant that is just expiring, called Communities Putting Prevention to Work. It tried to push vegetables and fruits in King County neighborhoods such as this one, with bad health profiles. Project managers are still analyzing the outcomes, but they say it clearly had mixed success, says Ryan Kellogg of Public Health Seattle & King County.The project worked best when ethnic grocery stores joined the cause. Stockbox happens to be across the street from a Mexican mini-mart, and there's no telling how the competition will sort out.Ferrence says Stockbox hopes to open four more stores in 2013, in south Seattle and south King County.

You might have trouble finding any attractive vegetables or fruits if you shop in the wrong stores. It’s especially challenging in poor neighborhoods, where mini-marts packed with beer, cigarettes and junk food may be all you can find.One solution to be tested in Seattle this month will be in the form of a healthy corner store. Call it a mini-grocery.And in this case, "mini" truly means very small. It started out inside a single shipping container. The first version was plopped down in a parking lot, like an espresso stand.Now,  it’s evolved into a tiny storefront. It's called "Stockbox Grocery," in the South Park neighborhood, on Seattle’s industrial southern edge. Co-owner Carrie Ferrence says it’s a different niche than a super-market."There's a lot of potential for us to reimagine what a grocery store is," says Ferrence.Her model is the old-fashioned corner store, before they all became convenience stores. And she says the economics pencil out, because of the low overhead on a store thats one-tenth the size of a typical grocery store."When we go to grocery we often buy the same five and ten items, every single week -- milk, bread,  dairy, meat and produce. And those are the items that go bad the most frequently and are really the most important part of our food staple system," she says.Stockbox shelves will be stocked with perishables. The first thing you'll see is a big produce display. Plus, they will stock a few snacks -- fruit leather for kids, wine for adults, and ice cream for everyone.One of the biggest public health challenges today – maybe the biggest -- is getting people to eat more produce, and less sugary or processed stuff. And if those basics are hard to get, you get out of the habit of buying and eating them. Community groups suggested one other category, she says:"Basic grab and go options -- sandwiches, salads, burritos, things that are packed full of vegetables and protein."Those will serve the lunch time crowd along busy 14th Avenue, at the foot of the South Park Bridge.Stockbox is a for-profit company, trying to prove healthy foods can survive without public subsidies in poor neighborhoods. They did get startup assistance from King County, in the form of an $11,700 grant and connections to a lender.That was a tiny part of a two-year federal stimulus grant that is just expiring, called Communities Putting Prevention to Work. It tried to push vegetables and fruits in King County neighborhoods such as this one, with bad health profiles. Project managers are still analyzing the outcomes, but they say it clearly had mixed success, says Ryan Kellogg of Public Health Seattle & King County.The project worked best when ethnic grocery stores joined the cause. Stockbox happens to be across the street from a Mexican mini-mart, and there's no telling how the competition will sort out.Ferrence says Stockbox hopes to open four more stores in 2013, in south Seattle and south King County.

Seattle’s a hub for cancer research, and usually that means scientists are looking for cures or new treatments. Now a new project will try to tell us if those treatments are worth the price-tag.If you were diagnosed with any common cancer – such as breast, colon, prostate – you’d find there are a lot of potential treatments. Dr. Scott Ramsey at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center says the next step isn’t clear: "How would you know where to go? Who the best doctors are? Who has the most experience with the cancer that you have? What are the choices for the treatments that you have, and what would the costs to you be for that treatment? "I'm doing this research, and I couldn’t find that information."Ramsey’s research is all about figuring out which treatments are most effective. He searches in databases from doctors and insurance companies. And he’s found repeatedly that certain treatments tend to work better – but not all cancer doctors stick with what’s proven.“We would like to identify why that’s happening and if its happening inappropriately, find ways to change that.”The project is supposed to help patients – and fight the scary expense of cancer treatment. For example, Ramsey says a typical colon cancer chemotherapy has gone up from $40,000 to $250,000 … in just the last five years.That’s leaving cancer patients in extreme financial hardship. He admits some fellow researchers and drug companies might see this as threatening … but he’s counting on cooperation from local doctors and insurers to make this first-in-the nation program work.