The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Member Map
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. General Discussion & Feedback
  3. Radio Show & Podcast Feedback
  4. Discuss: Getting Under Your Skin
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Discuss: Getting Under Your Skin

  • 5 Replies
  • 8683 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline thedoc (OP)

  • Forum Admin
  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 510
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 17 times
    • View Profile
Discuss: Getting Under Your Skin
« on: 22/05/2009 11:07:51 »
Science gets under your skin on this week's Naked Scientists, where we find out how human skin colour evolved to make the best of our sunlight.  We explain why albino people have no skin pigment at all and how to heal wounds without leaving scars.  Also, the nano-scale media storage that will last a billion years, the toxic bite of the komodo dragon and the biological link between cancer and depression.  Plus, we shine a light on jaundice phototherapy, with the help of a urinating glass baby!
Listen to this Show

If you want to discuss this show, or ask a question, this is the place to do it.
Logged
 



Tom Whitelaw

  • Guest
Eyes like a Hawk!
« Reply #1 on: 27/05/2009 15:44:29 »
Tom Whitelaw asked the Naked Scientists:
   
I booked into a hotel in Pakistan opened my room window only to be attacked by a hawk (who had a nest on the airconditioner).

Later, at a buffet on the roof, it recognised me and attacked me on sight!

Tom

What do you think?
Logged
 

Offline Chemistry4me

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 7705
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Eyes like a Hawk!
« Reply #2 on: 27/05/2009 21:09:35 »
Well, hopefully, it didn't claw your eyes out.

Quote from: Tom Whitelaw on 27/05/2009 15:44:29
Later, at a buffet on the roof, it recognised me and attacked me on sight!
What...!
Logged
 

Bob Person

  • Guest
A tendency towards Lamarkian explanations...
« Reply #3 on: 04/06/2009 10:30:02 »
Bob Person asked the Naked Scientists:
   So, I have been noticing on the several science shows I've listened to including "The Naked Scientists" a tendency toward sort of Lamarkian explanations of evolved features. One example was the recent discussion of why flowers have cone-shaped cells. Another is reflected in this back and forth between Chris and a guest:

"Chris Smith: But as I move away from Africa and go to climes like Britain where we have much less sun exposure, what's the point of going white? Why don't I just stay dark, because then I won't break down my folate and I won't get skin cancer?         

Nina Jablonski: The reason that your ancestors underwent loss of pigmentation is that you still need to make vitamin-D in your skin. Your skin not only protects you from a lot of stuff but it's a vitamin factory, it makes vitamin-D. As you get farther north, the farther away from the equator, up where you are living, you get about two months during the year when you have ultraviolet-B radiation in the atmosphere that can cause vitamin-D production, you'd need to lose as much pigment as possible to take advantage of that very rare UVB; and that's why you and your ancestors look the way you do."

I don't believe there really was purposeful evolution toward being white. Are we all Lamarkian at the core, do we just need to be more careful how we express ourselves, or both? What do you think?

What do you think?
Logged
 

Offline BenV

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1502
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
A tendency towards Lamarkian explanations...
« Reply #4 on: 04/06/2009 11:02:31 »
Hi Bob,

I think you're quite right, this is just a convenient way of expressing ourselves but it could easily be misconstrued as Lamarkian.  I think that it's easier and quicker to refer to a population as "I change" or "we changed" rather than the more accurate discussion of selective pressures acting on a population, and the resulting change in future generations of that population.

It's something we will try to look out for in the future, as we don't want to lead people into misunderstanding our coverage of evolution!
Logged
 



Offline Kevan Gelling

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 52
  • Activity:
    0%
    • View Profile
Discuss: Getting Under Your Skin
« Reply #5 on: 25/06/2009 13:48:30 »
Quote from: Bob Person on 04/06/2009 10:30:02
Bob Person asked the Naked Scientists:
I don't believe there really was purposeful evolution toward being white. Are we all Lamarkian at the core, do we just need to be more careful how we express ourselves, or both?

Unless epigenetics can affect our skin colour.

My own anecdotal experience is that Brits of Afro-Caribbean descent tend to be lighter than Africans living in the UK.
Logged
 



  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.143 seconds with 47 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.