Your dream could soon become a reality, if ReadyBot has anything to say about it. A group of scientists banned together to answer a challenge question: How many common and household commercial tasks can a two-armed, moderate-dexterity simple robot perform?

The answer: plenty. to see ReadyBot in action, click on the video, which is set to music similar to that of 50s Sears infomercials. So far, the Bot can raise and lower itself; grab, move, and tip dishes; and squeegee and wash countertops. Between this and a Roomba, just think of the possibilities! Your very own version of The Jetsons' Rosie (though it always irked me that she had female traits - ReadyBot will hopefully remain gender-neutral).

As you watch the clip, you'll notice that it moves fairly slowly, but the Bot scientists claim that this is intentional, and that it is intended to do work when people are at work or out of the house, so the lack of speed shouldn't be an issue.

Their ultimate goal? To program ReadyBot to complete approximately 80% of typical kitchen tasks (loading the dishwasher, washing dishes, etc) and then make it available for mass production. The scientists also claim that the price won't be too prohibitive, but we'll believe it when we see it.

In the meantime, one can only dream...

Recently, German researchers fed lab mice separate "human" and "chimp" diets, and within just two weeks, were able to notice distinct psychological and genetic differences in the rodents.

There were three different diets: a raw food-only diet; meals from the researchers' local cafeteria; and a pure fast-food diet. The researchers found a huge difference in the livers of the mice with a chimp diet versus those with a human diet (I'm scared to hear about the difference in their hearts and arteries!) They found thousands of differences in the genes expressed in the mouse livers, which they think may be caused by our differences in diets.

...You got all that? Okay. The scientists also found that said genes seemed to evolve faster than other genes.

So, basically, our ancestors' adoption of meat and cooked foods may have shaped us into the carnivorous, brownie-eating, beer-guzzling beings we are today.

After six years testing the safety of cloning, the Food and Drug Administration has deemed cloned animals fit for consumption.

Don't like it? Well, you don't have much of a choice. The FDA also decided that labels won't have to divulge whether or not they contain parts from cloned animals, because the ingredients are no different from that of animals raised the old-fashioned way. Besides, aside from the creep-out factor, most people probably wouldn't choose to eat a cloned animal to begin with; they cost ten times as much as your average, farm-raised cow or pig.

Americans should be used to to science and industry playing a starring role in our food choices. From pesticides to force-fed ducks to hormone-laden dairy products, it shouldn't be any surprise that cloned animals were the next step.

And our food is already meddled with, sometimes without our knowledge (ever wonder how you can perfectly fresh peaches and strawberries in the middle of February?), and sometimes quite obviously (plutots, anyone?) But while this shouldn't come as a shock, this newest agricultural development does seem like an eerie foreshadowing of events to come.

The Food and Drug Administration has concluded that "meat and milk from clones and their progeny is as safe to eat as corresponding products derived from animals produced using contemporary agricultural practices," meaning that not only is the meat likely to be approved for human consumption and sold at stores, but that there will be no label to distinguish it from natural meat. Consumer groups want to see a label on the meat because most (64%) people are uncomfortable with the idea of eating cloned food, but the FDA's decision is based on the fact that there is no food safety issue in question, and no need to "warn" people about what they're eating in this case. "The bottom line is, we don't want to misinform consumers with some sort of implied message of difference," said one researcher, although this does seem to be at odds with existence of labels that indicate the difference between organic/nonorganic produce and grass fed beef, where there is not necessarily a health risk or benefit in question.

The Consumer Federation of America said that they, along with other groups, will ask food companies and supermarkets not to carry food from clones. "Meat and milk from cloned animals have no benefit for consumers, and consumers don't want them in their foods."

Aside from willpower and peer pressure, there are few things that can actually dissuade someone who really wants to drink from drinking. That's why AA has a 12-step program, not a 1-step one. But some scientists in Australia have just announced that they have a drug that may stop people from drinking. The compound blocks the production of a chemical called orexin that induces euphoria. So far, the compound has only been tested on rats, but it was remarkably successful in stopping the compulsion to drink alcohol in rats that had developed/were forced to develop an addition to it. In fact, they completely stopped drinking it when offered.

The theory is that the pleasurable effects of drinking, or the perceived pleasure that triggers the orexin system, are what drive the cravings and taking that away eliminates the reason for the craving to exist. Presumably, the drinker would still feel the effects of the alcohol, but there would no longer be any type of "high." Scientists also think that a similar treatment could be developed to treat other addictions, such as binge eating.

Obviously, it still has a long way to go before something like this will be available to the public, but it certainly sounds like it could help some people eliminate a step or two if they have a drinking problem.

If you want to believe the most recent food-causing-cancer study, you'll have to cross another thing off the list of foods that we aren't supposed to eat. A Swedish study has just linked sugar consumption to an increased risk of pancreatic cancer. The study followed almost 80,000 people aged 45-83 for about 7 years and noted that those who added five or more servings of sugar to their food were "69 percent more likely to develop pancreatic cancer than those who never added sugar to their food or drink." Drinking multiple soft drinks and eating sweetened or stewed fruit increased the risk, too.

But like the study that linked bread to cancer, this is far from conclusive. The study found no evidence of increased risk from eating "sweets, marmalade, or jams," all of which are typically high in sugar. And other studies have linked diabetes and obesity to an increased risk on pancreatic cancer, both of which are not necessarily only linked to the consumption of sugary drinks. There was no mention of what the difference might be between the quality of sugar found in stewed fruit versus that found in jam.

In New Zealand, scientists have been able to determine precisely which genes are responsible for the individual flavors and scents of fruits and flowers. As a result of this breakthrough, it will now be possible to actually produce natural flavorings without having to resort to chemical extractions or other synthetic processes, not to mention that it will save time trying to match the flavors of new products to natural ones. The scientists inserted the newly-identified genes into bacteria and model plants, which then produced the same results. Using a process known as biofermentation, they will be able to harvest the flavors and smells from the cultures in which they are grown and then implant them into food products (or perfumes).

The upshot of all of this is that it opens the door to a nearly infinite number of flavors - all-natural flavors, at that. As consumer demand increasingly grows for "natural" products, it seems likely that novel, but natural, flavorings could catch on. Green apple potato chips, anyone?

Cream cheese was developed in America in 1872. It is unusual, different from other cheeses, not because of its smooth creamy texture, but because of how it is made. While many cheeses are thickened with an enzyme in rennet, cream cheese is thickened with the addition of an acid.

That may sound like a reasonably simple process, but the truth is the cream cheese is hard to make. And when things go wrong and the cheese comes out smelling like "dirty socks, cardboard, or Robitussin," companies have to call in the experts. Enter the University of Wisconsin-Madison Center for Dairy Research (UWCDR), where scientists do research to unlock the secrets of cream cheese and help manufacturers solve any problems that come up.

Are round salt granules a big deal? They are for two Indian scientists working on developing the spherical crystals. In a recent Food Navigator interview, Parthasarathi Dastidar and Pushpito K. Ghosh said that round salt granules are less apt to cake in extreme heat and would, in general, be easier to pour. The two created the dodecahedron-shaped granules of salt with the help of a glycine, a sweet amino acid. Since round salt wouldn't need any anti-caking agents, it would be totally clear, the scientists told Food Navigator. Crucial to the survival of mankind? Probably not. Neat and interesting? Sure.

Scientists around the world are working to develop a reliable process that will grow meat in a lab from a few cells. So far, they have successfully grown meat tissue that, while it smells like meat, neither looks nor tastes very much like the real thing. The process has only been done on a small scale and the results resemble jelly. Flesh colored jelly. To get an idea of what this product currently looks like, take a look at PBS's virtual taste test, which compares the properties of lab meat to animal meat.

Scientists hope to see this jelly develop into something that looks and tastes like the cuts of meat that can be achieved from butchering a cow - without having to kill the cow and with the added benefit of being able to grow the meat at home in an incubator. Achieving this goal would nearly eliminate the need for animals in meat production and reduce the total energy and expense required to feed, raise, slaughter and transport those animals.

Meat from a non-sentient source presents an interesting problem for vegetarians, as many become vegetarians for ethical reasons alone, objecting to the practice of raising animals for slaughter. Because the initial culture cells can be taken without harming the donor animal, no animals would be harmed in this type of meat production. In-home meat growth might also limit access to truly natural meat, which may raise concerns of those who are against artificial and otherwise modified food products.

There is a short video segment available on the PBS website about cultured meat and a poll which reveals that 45% of respondents would eat the artificially grown meat. I can't honestly count myself among them.

A study was done recently that concluded that obesity might be contagious. This conclusion was extrapolated from data that showed an increase in the weight of chickens who had been exposed to the human adenovirus Ad-37. Adenoviruses can cause colds and other illnesses in humans. The reasoning seems to follow this line of thought: Chickens, when exposed to a particular, contagious human virus, got fat . Since it is a human virus, humans who catch this virus will get fat. Since the virus is contagious, it follows that obesity is contagious.

So is obesity only contagious when the carrier of the virus has a cold? Can you catch it from sitting next to someone on an airplane? To say that this line of reasoning is flawed is an understatement. It is simply incorrect.

Simply because a cold can cause a chicken (or a human, for that matter) to gain weight does not mean that all weight gain is caused by colds in general or this virus in particular. Nor does it mean that because colds are contagious, so is weight gain. Someone needs to retake their deductive reasoning courses.

 

Scientists in Taiwan have bred, through transgenic engineering, three glowing pigs. Not only do these pigs glow, they glow green due to jellyfish DNA inserted into the pigs' embryos. Other labs have produced partially green pigs, but these are the first completely colored ones, with everything from green organs to green-tinged eyes and skin. Scientists intend to use green pigs such as these for research purposes, because genetic material taken from them will be easy to spot, due to its color, in ordinary pigs.

Admittedly, these pigs are not currently intended for eating, but suddely "green eggs and ham" seems like more of a possibility, doesn't it?