Skip to main content

"Henry... how many mummified bodies do you have?"

I saw an advert on the tube today for the latest installment at the Welcome Trust called 'Things': a public exhibit where people are encouraged to bring along a "thing"... simple enough, however I didn't think it had the pull of the previous exhibition called 'SKIN'. Much better I'm sure you'd agree. The SKIN exhibition documented numerous objet d'peau including a section on "dermographism": carving into your own skin. I shared an anecdote with my friend about people in school we knew who used to scratch (harmlessly) their latest crush onto their arm with a compass as a sign of childish devotion. When we strolled further around the exhibits we came across a picture of one of these school friends, had they been in a 1920s French lunatic asylum. Pictured was an inmate who had carved the name of her condition into her back in 6inch high gashes. We paused, not only due to the sheer specticle, but also to question why she chose such an inaccessible area as her back to perform her scribbling... eventually we gave kudos for the dexterity (as we decided that this demonstration of skill was her motivation) needed to perform such legible engraving, but decided she lacked imagination - either way our own experience with dermographism paled in significance...



I admire Henry Wellcome and his ludicrous number of fascinating finds, however I'd draw the line at collecting mummified Peruvian boys. I can understand possibly having one stashed away in the airing cupboard (bringing it out for special occasions), but Henry went whole hog and got himself 3! Check them out in the permanent Wellcome collection.

http://www.wellcomecollection.org/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Rudolf Virchow

Following on from my visit to the Huntarian museum in London, which documented anatomical specimens in innumerable jars, I visited the German equivalent in Berlin - The Medizinhistorisches Museum on Charite University campus. As expected from the guide books and hype from my Deutsch colleagues, the exhibit is truly fascinating with some morbid sections which warrant the over 16s certification. It is these specimens that are naturally off-putting to some (as evolution dictates innate disgust at abnormality) which are incredibly fascinating documents of life trying to survive regardless of aberrant genetics. Naturally one feels a sadness when viewing some specimens, especially due to the young age of the subject, but regardless, scientific intrigue overrides in this astounding museum. In a section of the museum devoted to eminent German scientists I read about Rudolf Virchow, and whilst reading the short summary next to a compilation of his belongings in a cabinet, I realised how

"How do NK cells know not to kill RBCs?"

I was recently asked about the surveillance system present within immunity which operates to kill virally infected cells by lack of MHC expression, and why this same system doesn't destroy red blood cells (RBC), which lack MHC. One function of Natural Killer (NK) cells is to destroy cells infected by viruses, which have a mechanism of evading T-cell killing by down-regulating MHC class I expression. MHC class I molecules are expressed on every cell in the body apart from RBCs; a lack of expression is detected by NK cells which act to destroy the cell. However, RBC remain unharmed. SEM of NK cells Red Blood Cells                         V.S Like everyone else I assumed the almighty google would provide me with the answer to my friends question, so I typed in my query and the only relevant link was to a 'yahoo answers' page, which answered a succinctly phrased question which I've used to entitle this blog entry. Unfortunately the answer just stated