Sentences with phrase «what human biology»

Not exact matches

A former health care investment analyst with a degree in biology from Yale University and current CEO of the company, Wojcicki is fascinated by the mysteries of the genome and what it can reveal about the human body.

If we have new knowledge of human biology that is vastly different than the NT era, shld we not apply that to the question of what might constitute immoral behaviour.

In fact, however you study human beings in biology, whilst you will find out true and important things, you will never really understand what it is to be human — you will miss the point.

Using what we know about biology both have been around longer than humans so neither could be caused by humans.

Applying Dedalus's remark to biology, one can ask: What ensures that the human species will not someday be one of the «thousand types» for which nature does not care, which will perish in a global holocaust of the type that befell the dinosaurs?

12 Even on the assumption of a Vitalism of essentially higher principles of that kind, which raise the organic, as an intrinsically higher level of reality, above merely inorganic matter, and constitute biology as an independent science, and even if we regard the entelechy factor as simple and indivisible, there would only be an eductio e potentia materiae when a new living being came into existence, if we excluded creation in this case in the way it is exemplified in the human soul, though that is not very easy to prove, and at the same time rejected the not at all absurd supposition that in the generation of new life below the human level what happens is only the extension of the entelechial function of one and the same vital principle to a new position in space and time within inorganic matter.

What's more, since the only designing intelligence that could have played a role in the origin and history of life (including human life) must have been nonhuman, my theory of design detection is irrelevant and misleading for biology.

Please explain to me what the missing link is and where you think the gap is in biology's current model of human evolution is.

personal preferences, influenced by recent Western cultural values and social ideology, NOT studies of the natural biology and needs of the human infant have argued against babies arousing at night to feed a lot; and, indeed, the «sleep like a baby» or «shush the baby is sleeping» model, while some kind of western ideal is NOT what babies are designed to do nor experience, and it is definitely not in their own biological or emotional or social best interest.

Like human taste buds which reward us for eating what's overwhelmingly critical for survival i.e. fats and sugars, a consideration of human infant and parental biology and psychology reveal the existence of powerful physiological and social factors that promote maternal motivations to cosleep and explain parental needs to touch and sleep close to baby.

Professor McKenna advises «from an evolutionary and biological perspective, proximity to parental sounds, smells, gases, heat and movement during the night is precisely what the human infant «expects», and in our push for infant independence, we are forgetting that an infant's biology can not change quite as quickly as cultural child - care patterns.»

A scientific reason could be bypassing human - made rules (visa rules) which may prevent special kind of people come to U.S, in this interpretation lottery visa acts like what mutation does in biology.

Tom Kirkwood of Newcastle University, UK, disagrees with the idea of a limit to human lifespan: «The idea does not really fit what we already know about the biology of the ageing process.

What we are trying to do is introduce to biology techniques normally used in chemistry or physics, using inherent chemical or structural properties of the human stem cells.

This is the end of natural biology, now we are into synthetic biology where humans have greater control than ever over life around them, and our ability to manipulate life can be fairly said to be unequalled in all of humankind's time before — what does that mean?

But we looked at what happens if you take human body and you leave it be; a human body that has, you know, died — a person has died — and then what happens with the biology then.

«The Neandertal genome sequence just by itself will not tell us what makes humans special, it will always be in conjunction with other work that really addresses the biology of a specific change,» he says.

We share a lot of basic biology and we increasingly find that what happens in flies also happens in humans.»

It may do for geoscience what human genome sequencing did for biology

This teaches us more about what components of human lymphoma biology are most fundamental and critical.

I'm not trying to make race go away but to redefine it using what we have learned about biology through the Human Genome Project.

«Making the movements of HIV visible so that we can follow, in real time, how surface proteins on the virus behave will hopefully tell us what we need to know to prevent fusion with human cells — if you can prevent viral entry of HIV into immune cells, you have won,» says Dr. Blanchard, who is also associate director of Weill Cornell's chemical biology program.

The phrase is a fine combination of old - fashioned sexism and convenient biology - speak which, by reducing human individuals to a biological organism, «man», sweeps away social complexities and confines debate to the simplicities of what we often call «nature».

«Studying the biology of MPA helps us understand what may be driving the increased rate of HIV infection seen in human research.

Take the most complex organ in the human body, superimpose the legacy of biology's biggest research project, and what have you got?

«Spaceflight data is hard to come by; we should remember what's already been done, so we can make the most of new opportunities to do human research in space,» said corresponding author Dr. Virginia Wotring, associate professor of the Center for Space Medicine and pharmacology and chemical biology at Baylor College of Medicine.

You are human, what could be more rewarding than studying the origins and diversity of human biology and behavior?

Research on the most tractable models, such as Drosophila, is greatly advancing our understanding of what specific genes do, including many directly relevant to human biology and medicine.

But certain aspects of this rodent's biology — and responses to stress — are enough like a human's for it to «model» what might happen in people.

We tried to keep an open mind but some of the ideas we had — including an aberrant immune reaction — were beyond what we thought is amenable to study in wildlife diseases, given that so much less is known about wildlife biology than human or laboratory animal biology.

«If we can then relate that to ancient human species... What this paper shows is the sagittal crest might also play a role in how those hominins are developing social structures that can then be linked to biology beyond diet.»

Think back to your human biology class (minus the traumatizing exam) and answer these questions: What is the largest organ in the body?

Unless you have a degree in human biology... and in many cases even if you do... you do not understand what «metabolism» means.

The following webpage does an *** awesome *** job of explaining in lay person's terms what we know about human biology and our natural foods: http://michaelbluejay.com/veg/natural.html

If the subject of «what are humans supposed to eat» interests you, I recommend looking at human biology.

Humans evolved as opportunistic omnivores, so not sure what biology class would teach that we are herbivores.

What I mean is that humans do lots of things, including eating, based on custom and availability, not biology.

The Social Conquest of the Earth is an astoundingly ambitious work in which he uses a lifetime in evolutionary biology to explore the human condition — what are we like, how did we get that way, and what is likely to become of us.

The news media stigmatize radiation as a much greater risk than it is, based on the biology of what ionizing radiation can do to human health, in many many ways, and it that overall alarmism influences the way people respond to this threat.

In IPCC terms, AGW would be what is in the WG1 report covering temperature and precipitation and acidification in the earth system, while I would say that CAGW is what is in WG2 which covers ecological and human impacts, so I would term AGW as the physical science and CAGW as mostly biology and societal impacts.