Register Log in

Scientific Method / Science & Exploration

Kennewick Man

How did humans come to settle the Americas? A 9,000-year-old skeleton may hold …

Nine years of court cases over the case of the Kennewick Man have come to end, with a win for the scientists involved. The prize was the permission to examine the most contentious story in American anthropology.  In 1996, a skeleton was found on the Columbia River in Kennewick, Washington. What was surprising was the age—over 9,000 years, making it one of the earliest Americans.

The Americas were the last settled continents on humankind's journey across the world, across the Bering Straits and into Alaska and all points south. Although the earliest confirmed settlements are thought to have been in Alaska around 12000 B.C., very few remains have been found that date back further than 8,000 years, making Kenny a rare glimpse at the first Americans. More recent Americans had other concerns though. Four local Native American tribes, the Umatilla, Yakama, Nez Perce, and Colville tribes, claim the remains as theirs and want them reburied, not studied.

Nine years of court cases followed, with the tribes maintaining that the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act applied and that this skeleton was a tribal artifact. A group of anthropologists challenged this, and after working through the legal system, a panel of judges were convinced that the remains have no link to more recent residents. The eight scientists responsible for bringing the suit have been allowed 10 days access to the skeleton, enough time to make full scans of the skull and to determine the nature of a stone blade buried deep into the pelvis.

Much of the controversy over this case was that Kenny looked too Eurasian.  Tribes of Native Americans who consider themselves the original inhabitants of land taken away from them may indeed have final say over the fate of Kenny. But with luck he might shed more light on the make up of those that crossed the frozen seas to start the New World.

BRCA2 gene patent upheld

With innovation and competition being what they are, the money involved in biotech has meant that people will try to protect what they see as their intellectual property, up to and including the patenting of genes themselves. Not artificial genes mind you, but the same sequence you or I might have, having been passed down through family trees dating back to prehistory and life in the trees. 

While I, and many other scientists like me, might agree with patenting custom genes that are coded for novel proteins in the same way new compounds or drugs or methods might be, those in academia tend to draw the line at the patenting of naturally occurring genes, given that they’re common to many of us, and we don’t patent fingers or toes or hair.

Despite saying no to allowing software patents recently, the EU has said yes to a patent on a gene called BRCA2, and therefore control over who is allowed to test for this gene. The purpose of patenting BRCA2 is "for diagnosing a predisposition to breast cancer in Ashkenazi Jewish women," and if you want to make a DNA probe to test for it, you have to pay Myriad, the Salt Lake City biotech that’s infamous for patenting this gene and another closely related one, BRCA1. The genes are involved in braeast cancers. Opponents are understandably unhappy.

"This is definitely not the way to go," said Geert-Jan van Ommen, a human geneticist from the University of Leiden, in The Netherlands. "Because on the one hand, you would have to ask patients who come into your clinic and want to be tested if they are Ashkenazi Jews. And then if they are, it would block them from being diagnosed in countries that tend not to pay serious licenses for the diagnosis."

I must admit to being puzzled as to why software, something I view as the product of imagination and work, is not allowed to be patented, but it is OK to allow someone with a sequencer to own a particular naturally occurring gene. The impediment to open and public research is a concern, and with companies beholden to shareholders to make money, a sensible one. Is the act of simply reading a genetic sequence really enough to justify the awarding of a patent? I’m not allowed to patent a book I read, why should my DNA be any different?

Avian Flu concerns continue

Developments continue surrounding the rather nasty-looking strain of avian flu currently crossing the species barrier in the far east. The culprit is H5N1, a virus that by now is no doubt becoming familiar. Concerns are raised by a report in Science of a more lethal variant of H5N1 currently infecting wild birds in a remote region of China. While a more lethal variant might not be such a bad thing per se—it could well kill its hosts quicker than they could infect others, the fact that disease is spreading with migratory birds is alarming.

Although livestock birds are segregated from wild populations in the west, in less developed parts of the world hygiene is not as good, and tests suggest that this new variant is more pathogenic in other mammals.  World Health Organization officials did stop short of raising the threat level of a global pandemic last week over the possible number of infections in Vietnam, but experts warn that the virus is at a "tipping point."

Meat in a tube?

Being a carnivore isn’t always easy. Lots of people disagree with eating bits of animals, some for religious reasons, others for emotional ones, and yet more out of fear of environmental contamination or other hazards resulting from industrialized animal husbandry. It is also true that many more resources are consumed in the production of energy through livestock when compared to that derived from plants. This week sees the announcement of a technique that could one day alleviate those concerns from many, only to be replaced by a whole new load.

Advances in cell culture, working towards the days of being able to build replacement organs in vitro, will also make possible the idea of artificially grown meats, complete with beneficial levels of just the right kind of fatty acid, or a custom flavor or shape, along with no cute offspring staring on with large, sad eyes while mummy gets (and gives us) the chop. Just how happy people will be to eat meat that grew from a pod or was seeded in a matrix remains to be seen. Resistance to genetically modified crops is already strong, but when McDonald's introduces the "cruelty free bioMcNugget," in a range of exciting colors and flavors, there may well be enough people who are fine with the idea for it to become widespread. Sometimes being a foodie and scientist can be so conflicting…

In other news:

  • Wildlife corridors appear to work, a fact that anyone will concede upon hearing about mountain lions in Sorrento Valley.
  • Zero was a concept too deep for the Romans, but parrots are down with it.
  • Columbia’s plume left a lingering cloud presence.
  • Fires begun by humans may have caused an ecological crisis in Australia 50,000 years ago.
  • Researchers gain new insight into sleep paralysis.
  • Can fish see red? Scientists said no, but jellyfish say yes.
  • Pressed for time? Maybe you can catch up during 2005's leap second.

Expand full story

You must to comment.

Need to register for a new account?

If you don't have an account yet it's free and easy.