[www.nytimes.com]

[www.nytimes.com]

---

!#$@@$#!

If there are spelling issues, please pardon, Owen the cat is sitting on my keyboard.

no thanks to bacteria experimentation.
other has a paywall/registration.

Both very interesting articles; thanks, Fritz.

I have long wondered about the benefits of our contemporary obsession with soaps and other cleansing nostrums. Not only may we be washing off the good bacteria, but we might be making it easier for the bad ones to affect us.

The article on neuro-electrical interactions with the immune system made me wonder whether there might be some real benefit to acupuncture after all—I've always been dubious about its claims.

The NYT didn't stop me with a paywall on either article. I'm not a subscriber, so count myself lucky this time

/Mr Lynn

---

"Hillbilly at Harvard"
Honky-tonk Country and Bluegrass
Founded in 1948 by Pappy Ben Minnich
Saturdays 9am - 1pm Eastern
WHRB-FM, Cambridge, MA
Streaming at [www.WHRB.org]
Be there!
The HAH weblog: [hillbillyatharvard.wordpress.com]

Topical weblog: [walkingcreekworld.wordpress.com]

On the river in Saxonville.

Quote
mrlynn
The NYT didn't stop me with a paywall on either article. I'm not a subscriber, so count myself lucky this time

didn't wanna mess wit no yankee hillbilly

---

!#$@@$#!

If there are spelling issues, please pardon, Owen the cat is sitting on my keyboard.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/02/2014 08:44AM by Fritz.

Interesting about Nitrosomonas eutropha. Though I'm wondering why they are testing this particular species when it is known that humans excrete urea, not ammonia, and unless genetically engineered, this species does not have urease to convert the urea to ammonia and carbon dioxide.

Quote
neophyte
Interesting about Nitrosomonas eutropha. Though I'm wondering why they are testing this particular species when it is known that humans excrete urea, not ammonia, and unless genetically engineered, this species does not have urease to convert the urea to ammonia and carbon dioxide.

It's for skin, not urethral, application. Didn't the article say something about sweat containing ammonia?

/Mr Lynn

Quote
mrlynn

Quote
neophyte
Interesting about Nitrosomonas eutropha. Though I'm wondering why they are testing this particular species when it is known that humans excrete urea, not ammonia, and unless genetically engineered, this species does not have urease to convert the urea to ammonia and carbon dioxide.

It's for skin, not urethral, application. Didn't the article say something about sweat containing ammonia?

/Mr Lynn

Sweat contains urea, so any ammonia on our skin depends on other bacterial species breaking down the urea to ammonia and carbon dioxide. And both are volatile, so I would imagine that levels of both on our skin would be minimal. But yes, undoubtedly trace amounts of ammonia could be detectable in our sweat.