Did you know that the last time a new U.S. military branch was created was in 1947? Yeah me neither. Turns out the Air Force is the youngest sibling of the branches in its spry 70ās. But that might eventually not be the case. President Trump (who, for the record, I am not a big fan of) first mentioned the idea of a space corps in March and again expressed the idea in an address in May.
He claims we are ādoing a tremendous amount of workā (roughly translating to āsome amount of work I am uncertain of so Iām going to use the same vague adjective I always useā) and a new force may be needed (but not seriously unless itās a great idea in which case he means it). Basically, this is not something heās striving for or passionate about, but he could be persuaded if someone makes a good pitch. So is it a good idea?
First, we should consider the fact that the U.S. military is already in space. According to Terry Virts, a former ISS commander, space was militarized 50 years ago. I actually find that reassuring. Knowing how the United States operates, I fully expect its military to stick its nose wherever possible. What Iām more concerned with is the conflict it creates. I have yet to hear of any space battles or sociological struggles among space society. I mean there isnāt really much of anyone up there to start beef with in the first place. That and they only really deal with GPS, weather, and communication. But Iām going to give the military credit for meeting my incredibly low expectations of not completely f****** s*** up with their presence. More specifically Iāll give the Air Force credit since theyāre the ones that handle the Space Command.
As for the second this to consider, well thatās all the bureaucratic bull that I know little to nothing about. I do know that itās complicated and dependent on officials that are not elected to their positions. And that a space corps would further complicate its already complicated ways. There are still some good points to be made about why we shouldnāt shoot this idea down. Sure, more money would be put towards bureaucracy, but itās still going towards space related projects, and Iām a sucker for that. Yes, we have NASA, and Iām all for NASA. Heck I would work for NASA if I could. My current life goal is actually to go into aeromedicine (possibly through the militaryāI acknowledge my bias). But from a competitive military standpoint, consider that other countries do not have NASA. While I havenāt researched the space capabilities of other countries, Iām willing to bet that there funding and projects are more militarily focused when it comes to space. Itās not unreasonable to think that we may be lagging behind and someone else might f*** s*** up in space before our military has the chance to do it first (not that I want eitherāagain I have low standards). Thatās also not considering current issues with funding and the NASA budget.
And thatās the third thing: money. Iāve never heard someone who works for a space related organization say they donāt want more funding, and many support space exploration and research. Then again, many people support less military funding in general. I do want to see more money go towards consistently reliable space transport development, new technologies like solar sails, stem cell growth research in zero gravity, etc. Some of that is marketable in a capitalist economy, but not all of it.
And maybe all this space development talk is overly romanticized and there will be a huge budget crisis and people will be stuck in space with no money and become space pirates. Thatās only kind of a negative though. I mean who doesnāt want to be a space pirate?
Honestly the whole idea is complicated enough that I donāt have a solid opinion on the matter. I have too many gaps in my knowledge to feel comfortable arguing for either side on such an important topic. Iām not in the military or government or NASA or any related organization; Iām just a U.S. citizen with a computer and internet access. Most people arenāt experts on these things though. I expect that nothing is to come of this unless someone who does know what they are talking about speaks up and leads this a idea they believe in.Ā That, or s*** will hit the fan hard enough in the future so that this becomes less of a discussion about options and instead of debate about necessity.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
ā Live Streamingā Interactive Chatā Private Showsā HD Qualityā Free Actions
Free to watch ā¢ No registration required ā¢ HD streaming
In a BBC article from back in 2015 (wow that feels like a long time ago to be relevant), the venom of a wasp was believed to capable to being used āas a weapon to fight cancer.ā The wasp in question is the Polybia paulista, or P.paulista for those who canāt bother with the full name, which are native to Brazil, Paraguay, and Argentina. A moment of silence for those who have to deal with these m*****f****** because their venom may actually be incredibly valuable.
Their venom contains a toxin referred to as MP1 (Or if you want to sound smarter, itās a lytic peptide called Polybia-MP1). The team from University of Brazil observed that MP1 interacts with the abnormally distributed fat molecules on the surface of cancer cells. While destroying just the surface sounds like no reason to get too excited, this does allow for holes to be formed and crucial molecules to leak out. This could lead to an entirely new branch of cancer treating drugs that can be used effectively in combination with other treatments.
But where are we now with this research? Again, the original content I found was from 2015. Of course, various trials need to be performed to verify safety and guarantee effectiveness in humans. With a little Google browsing, I found a research article that again concluded that cancer cells (with āmuch higher concentrations of phosphatidylserine lipidsā than normal cells) are susceptible to MP1 binding and therefore cell leakage. For those less familiar with the structure of cells, the cell membrane is made out of a phospholipid bilayer--essentially two layers of fatty acids that keep its cell guts and the outside environment from mixing. So cancer cells have more of this particular type of venom susceptible fatty acid in this very crucial membrane.
Still, the article ends with the usual spiel about future research and developing cancer therapies. The other articles I found were similar in nature; so far no actual MP1 therapies appear to have been launched into the world of medicine. Whether due to scientific complexities, funding issues, or the general slow paced and lengthy procedure required for getting drugs approved, I hope any roadblocks to getting this on the market are resolved soon. In the meantime, maybe getting stung by a wasp isnāt so bad.Ā ĀÆ\_(ć)_/ĀÆ
