Hi Payton, 

Hope you've already managed to clear the error - if not, I have a few pointers, and can probably give you more with a little more information. 

Let's start with the obvious - have you already power cycled everything? As in, power down the robot, disconnect from circuit, wait to let all caps bleed off, then reconnect and power on. 

Next: are there any error messages? If so, can you share screen shots? 

Also: if possible, open another method - do you get the same behavior? 

Lastly: each of the arms (assuming you have a standard 3-arm config with a RoNa, an MC96 and a LiHa) should be running their own homing routine during initialization - do any of them complete correctly? 

Feel free to DM me if you're still stuck. 

Cheers, 

Rikke 

On Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 16:43 Payton Brown <paytonb...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello, 

I was recently tasked with making a fully automatic worklist maker for the Tecan Freedom Evo I am attempting to test my worklist compatibility and the robot will not initialize out of the blue. It worked perfect last Friday and now it has decided to not work. Whenever I press initialize the robot moves the tips slightly and then the alarm sounds and the initialization fails. None of the tips are stuck any suggestions?

-Payton Brown

--
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups DIYbio group. To post to this group, send email to diy...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+un...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at https://groups.google.com/d/forum/diybio?hl=en
Learn more at www.diybio.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to diybio+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diybio/1740b003-c071-49de-a411-587b23533e30n%40googlegroups.com.

Hello, 

I was recently tasked with making a fully automatic worklist maker for the Tecan Freedom Evo I am attempting to test my worklist compatibility and the robot will not initialize out of the blue. It worked perfect last Friday and now it has decided to not work. Whenever I press initialize the robot moves the tips slightly and then the alarm sounds and the initialization fails. None of the tips are stuck any suggestions?

-Payton Brown

--
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups DIYbio group. To post to this group, send email to diybio@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at https://groups.google.com/d/forum/diybio?hl=en
Learn more at www.diybio.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to diybio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diybio/1740b003-c071-49de-a411-587b23533e30n%40googlegroups.com.

Hi guys, 

Disclaimer: Everyone who knows me knows that I am a big fan of vaccines. 

You might have heard that mRNA vaccines might be connected to myocarditis; and Adenovirus vector vaccine might be connected to rare blood clots.

I came across this very interesting scientific opinion piece in the BMJ. They argue that with genetic vaccines, the biodistribution should be better studied. 

"The pharmacovigilance data confirmed the [cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) ] incidences with all genetic vaccines (viral or non-viral vector), however, the regulatory authorities in their recent investigations reported that the CVST was unusually accompanied with thrombocytopenia in subjects injected with CoViD-19 viral vector vaccines (such as AstraZeneca and J&J/Janssen) than those injected with mRNA vaccines. We, therefore, looked at the preclinical studies of these vaccines to ascertain their biodistribution to body tissues (for instance brain) beyond the injection site for a possible explanation of the rare fatal clots formed in the brain."

"For COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine (Pfizer or Moderna), the biodistribution studies in animals were not conducted. The surrogate studies with luciferase and solid-lipid nanoparticles (Pfizer) confirm a biodistribution to the liver and other body tissues beyond the administration site [5]. For Moderna, the biodistribution of mRNA-1647 (encoding CMV genes) formulated in a similar lipid nanoparticulate delivery system confirms a biodistribution beyond the injection site, in particular, the distribution to the lymph nodes, spleen and the eye was noted [6]. However, the detailed tissue-specific distribution of mRNA vaccines encoding SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins (Pfizer or Moderna) is not fully known that can offer invaluable insights into the potential safety of these vaccines in peoples with pre-existing conditions or those on certain medications."

https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n958/rr-1

It does not sound too unreasonable that not all the LNPs/virus you inject into muscles remain there and gets taken up by muscle cells. Especially when you work with cationic liposomes, they will get taken up by any cell. And I have seen videos of people being injected with contrast liquid for radiologic imaging - that liquid gets distributed insanely fast through the blood. Assuming some mRNA gets delivered to heart cells... How much will stay in the injection site and ho much might leak? How long would they stay in the heart to fuse with those cells? Isn't there epithelial lining? Lots of questions. 

The article mentions that the current vaccines are still much better than the alternative (blood clots by COVID, which occur at a much higher rate). 

The recommendation is, to change the viral vectors or Lipid-Nanoparticles to be tissue specific. I have read of a company that incorporates proteins into uncharged LNPs and when the proteins bin to their ligand, tissue specific delivery is achieved. Here is the company (I don't have any ties to them or currently buy from them: Precision NanoSystems, Inc.). Viruses might be pseudotyped to go into specific cells only (fibroblasts, muscle cells?).

"However, if genetic vaccines were to be sustained beyond the CoViD19 pandemic, a tissue targeted approach may be the way forward to limit the antigen (the encoding gene) distribution to the intended tissues only to improve the vaccine safety profile for a global mass public rollout. In comparison, the conventional vaccine approaches (classic non-genetic formulations) have a long history of human use across much wider age groups (infants to elderly) and have an established safety profile despite the current challenges in antigen propagation and large-scale production in a timely manner using conventional methods."

Re: Cathal - Good info, thanks!

On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 11:14:33 AM UTC+2 Cathal Garvey wrote:

I recall early on they got a sequence of the original strain, which is probably termed "alpha" now under new WHO guidelines.

Anyway, it was pretty clear that it was just SARS after some evolution - changes mostly seemed incremental. Occams razor would seem to still suggest that it was as it always appeared to be: a long-threatened return of the same respiratory virus with some adaptations to let it break through this time and evade containment. The virus name indicates this: SARS-CoV2.

There is still the possibility of bio-error, that a lab handling SARS research samples may have accidentally let some escape, and that possibility is being taken seriously by some.

But it's less likely, in my opinion at least: the two vectors being "lab of trained technicians with specialised containment equipment" versus "much much bigger lab full of poachers with no training about zoonoses and no PPE".

As regards "bioterror", I would say that's practically outlandish. It's wholly unnecessary to explain anything about covid. And frankly, based on the horrific work done by the USA and USSR we know that deliberate effort can produce far more lethal outcomes. And if a less-resoirced group wanted to make a new outbreak I would guess they'd start somewhere other than a coronavirus. Yersinia Pestis would be a good place to start - did you know that it's basically unknown why the bubonic plague stopped circulating so widely in the late 1800s?

TLDR: The spread, mortality, etc. of COVID are quite consistent with a novel coronavirus. Bioerror is a less likely (IMO) possibility. The epidemiological community have been warning about new zoonotic pandemic outbreaks for decades and SARS and MERS were nearly it. In that respect, COVID's not special: just "third time lucky".

--

Sent with Tutanota, the secure & ad-free mailbox:

https://tutanota.com

6 Jun 2021, 09:52 by etcw...@hotmail.com:

Addendum. The reason I was talking about home-sequencing is that the conspiracy theorist I'm citing here claimed that scientists working with corona-DNA were all getting their sequence from a single apparently-trusted source, which would make it vulnerable to censorship. However, on consideration, it seems unlikely that biologists doing research into mutation and virus geneology would not be doing their own sequencing, and it seems not likely that an infectiousness-increasing engineered addition would have disappeared from the DNA of the still-spreading virus. Thus, it becomes much easier still to answer this question: no sequencing should be required, just grab a bunch of spread-as-far-apart-as-possible (in terms of the labs having done the sequencing) copies of published corona DNA and do the checking against HIV and gene-editing sequences. 

On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 10:39:46 AM UTC+2 Raza wrote:

I'm out of the loop - is this 'bioerror or bioterror' considered conspiracy craziness, or actually being accepted about COVID?

More importantly, how well is it supported? I've had people whom I consider a bit conspiracy-nuts make the claim to me that COVID was engineered; specifically, that some piece of HIV DNA was inserted into a coronavirus to make it more infectious/infectious to humans. And while that's clearly something to treat with a load of skepticism in an environment with so much motivated conspiracy theorizing going on, it's not fundamentally unrealistic. More importantly still, it seems like something that an independent biologist could fairly easily confirm or deny, if they sequenced corona and did some bioforensics. A piece of HIV DNA should be easily recognized, and in my limited expertise its insertion would probably leave detectable traces of recognizable gene-edit-supporting DNA somewhere as well, which would be further highlighted by differing from original previous DNA. 

I haven't been inclined to believe this claim so far, but AFAIC, science means operationalizing your hypotheses and checking the data rather than doing ideological flag-waving with the most science-community-approved opinion. It'd be really cool if a DIY biologist who just got a positive corona test would home-sequence their snot and provide some independent data on this - the biosafety would hardly get worse if they were sitting around and being contageous anyway.

On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 6:35:21 AM UTC+2 drllau wrote:

The long-now foundation encourages thinking beyond the next Wall-st quarter or even a single life-space. Here, an early bet

"A bioterror or bioerror will lead to one million casualties in a single event within a six month period starting no later than Dec 31 02020."

seems to be firmly on the side of the proponent. Some of the counter-arguments

•  Pool of potential perpetrators: The number of people eager for senseless destruction is small
  
• Multiply by the fraction with the knowledge, skill, intelligence, and discipline to engineer a superbug
  
• chance that the Black Hat will defeat the White Hats, namely the world's medical and epidemiological networks, who would combat an outbreak with containment, vaccines, antibiotics, etc.
  
• historical (ir)relevance The only successful past cases of bioterror are the Rajneeshee cult (751 cases, 0 deaths) and the Anthrax mailing (5 deaths). The Soviet-era anthrax bioweapon leak killed another 66.
  

Some of comments reflect how incredibly fast synthetic biology has advance in 2 decades

--

-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups DIYbio group. To post to this group, send email to diy...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+un...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at https://groups.google.com/d/forum/diybio?hl=en

Learn more at www.diybio.org

---

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to diybio+un...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diybio/dfaca467-9c40-4331-b4e5-6ca8ab1d1d51n%40googlegroups.com.

I'm looking to buy or build a spectrophotometer for my lab. I would like to use it to determine DNA, RNA, protein, and cell culture concentrations. Based on my research I think a nanodrop style is better because of the low volume, but whatever works is fine.

The only DIY option I have found is the build here:

https://hackteria.org/wiki/DIY_NanoDrop

With a video and modification done by Justin Atkin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIk8I10ZmYY

Anyways, both the hackteria build and Justin's modifications seem incomplete, especially for the full set of uses I would like.

Has anyone here built there own spectrophotometer or have any advice on building one?

I might end up just buying a nanodrop but considering how expensive it is I'm obviously considering all options, and definitely willing to build my own if I can get together a blueprint.

Since there was some COVID discussion I thought you might like this:

-  nasal spray

- 230x more potent that current vaccines

- effective against all known variants

- single dose

here:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34082438/

--
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups DIYbio group. To post to this group, send email to diybio@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at https://groups.google.com/d/forum/diybio?hl=en
Learn more at www.diybio.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to diybio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diybio/0ad5da18-f83e-4ea6-b071-1d0e9fdf7508n%40googlegroups.com.

On 5/26/21 2:48 PM, Yuriy wrote:
> John, Do you have a direct link?

Here is an example list that is about selling things related to other lists about HP and Tektronix test gear:

https://groups.io/g/Test-Equipment-For-Sale-Wanted-or-Exchange/message/2451

(It's not about bio equipment though...)

I recall early on they got a sequence of the original strain, which is probably termed "alpha" now under new WHO guidelines.

Anyway, it was pretty clear that it was just SARS after some evolution - changes mostly seemed incremental. Occams razor would seem to still suggest that it was as it always appeared to be: a long-threatened return of the same respiratory virus with some adaptations to let it break through this time and evade containment. The virus name indicates this: SARS-CoV2.

There is still the possibility of bio-error, that a lab handling SARS research samples may have accidentally let some escape, and that possibility is being taken seriously by some.

But it's less likely, in my opinion at least: the two vectors being "lab of trained technicians with specialised containment equipment" versus "much much bigger lab full of poachers with no training about zoonoses and no PPE".

As regards "bioterror", I would say that's practically outlandish. It's wholly unnecessary to explain anything about covid. And frankly, based on the horrific work done by the USA and USSR we know that deliberate effort can produce far more lethal outcomes. And if a less-resoirced group wanted to make a new outbreak I would guess they'd start somewhere other than a coronavirus. Yersinia Pestis would be a good place to start - did you know that it's basically unknown why the bubonic plague stopped circulating so widely in the late 1800s?

TLDR: The spread, mortality, etc. of COVID are quite consistent with a novel coronavirus. Bioerror is a less likely (IMO) possibility. The epidemiological community have been warning about new zoonotic pandemic outbreaks for decades and SARS and MERS were nearly it. In that respect, COVID's not special: just "third time lucky".

--

Sent with Tutanota, the secure & ad-free mailbox:

https://tutanota.com

6 Jun 2021, 09:52 by etcw...@hotmail.com:

Addendum. The reason I was talking about home-sequencing is that the conspiracy theorist I'm citing here claimed that scientists working with corona-DNA were all getting their sequence from a single apparently-trusted source, which would make it vulnerable to censorship. However, on consideration, it seems unlikely that biologists doing research into mutation and virus geneology would not be doing their own sequencing, and it seems not likely that an infectiousness-increasing engineered addition would have disappeared from the DNA of the still-spreading virus. Thus, it becomes much easier still to answer this question: no sequencing should be required, just grab a bunch of spread-as-far-apart-as-possible (in terms of the labs having done the sequencing) copies of published corona DNA and do the checking against HIV and gene-editing sequences. 

On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 10:39:46 AM UTC+2 Raza wrote:

I'm out of the loop - is this 'bioerror or bioterror' considered conspiracy craziness, or actually being accepted about COVID?

More importantly, how well is it supported? I've had people whom I consider a bit conspiracy-nuts make the claim to me that COVID was engineered; specifically, that some piece of HIV DNA was inserted into a coronavirus to make it more infectious/infectious to humans. And while that's clearly something to treat with a load of skepticism in an environment with so much motivated conspiracy theorizing going on, it's not fundamentally unrealistic. More importantly still, it seems like something that an independent biologist could fairly easily confirm or deny, if they sequenced corona and did some bioforensics. A piece of HIV DNA should be easily recognized, and in my limited expertise its insertion would probably leave detectable traces of recognizable gene-edit-supporting DNA somewhere as well, which would be further highlighted by differing from original previous DNA. 

I haven't been inclined to believe this claim so far, but AFAIC, science means operationalizing your hypotheses and checking the data rather than doing ideological flag-waving with the most science-community-approved opinion. It'd be really cool if a DIY biologist who just got a positive corona test would home-sequence their snot and provide some independent data on this - the biosafety would hardly get worse if they were sitting around and being contageous anyway.

On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 6:35:21 AM UTC+2 drllau wrote:

The long-now foundation encourages thinking beyond the next Wall-st quarter or even a single life-space. Here, an early bet

"A bioterror or bioerror will lead to one million casualties in a single event within a six month period starting no later than Dec 31 02020."

seems to be firmly on the side of the proponent. Some of the counter-arguments

•  Pool of potential perpetrators: The number of people eager for senseless destruction is small
  
• Multiply by the fraction with the knowledge, skill, intelligence, and discipline to engineer a superbug
  
• chance that the Black Hat will defeat the White Hats, namely the world's medical and epidemiological networks, who would combat an outbreak with containment, vaccines, antibiotics, etc.
  
• historical (ir)relevance The only successful past cases of bioterror are the Rajneeshee cult (751 cases, 0 deaths) and the Anthrax mailing (5 deaths). The Soviet-era anthrax bioweapon leak killed another 66.
  

Some of comments reflect how incredibly fast synthetic biology has advance in 2 decades

--

-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups DIYbio group. To post to this group, send email to diy...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+un...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at https://groups.google.com/d/forum/diybio?hl=en

Learn more at www.diybio.org

---

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to diybio+un...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diybio/dfaca467-9c40-4331-b4e5-6ca8ab1d1d51n%40googlegroups.com.

I'm out of the loop - is this 'bioerror or bioterror' considered conspiracy craziness, or actually being accepted about COVID?

More importantly, how well is it supported? I've had people whom I consider a bit conspiracy-nuts make the claim to me that COVID was engineered; specifically, that some piece of HIV DNA was inserted into a coronavirus to make it more infectious/infectious to humans. And while that's clearly something to treat with a load of skepticism in an environment with so much motivated conspiracy theorizing going on, it's not fundamentally unrealistic. More importantly still, it seems like something that an independent biologist could fairly easily confirm or deny, if they sequenced corona and did some bioforensics. A piece of HIV DNA should be easily recognized, and in my limited expertise its insertion would probably leave detectable traces of recognizable gene-edit-supporting DNA somewhere as well, which would be further highlighted by differing from original previous DNA. 

I haven't been inclined to believe this claim so far, but AFAIC, science means operationalizing your hypotheses and checking the data rather than doing ideological flag-waving with the most science-community-approved opinion. It'd be really cool if a DIY biologist who just got a positive corona test would home-sequence their snot and provide some independent data on this - the biosafety would hardly get worse if they were sitting around and being contageous anyway.

On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 6:35:21 AM UTC+2 drllau wrote:

The long-now foundation encourages thinking beyond the next Wall-st quarter or even a single life-space. Here, an early bet

"A bioterror or bioerror will lead to one million casualties in a single event within a six month period starting no later than Dec 31 02020."

seems to be firmly on the side of the proponent. Some of the counter-arguments

•  Pool of potential perpetrators: The number of people eager for senseless destruction is small
• Multiply by the fraction with the knowledge, skill, intelligence, and discipline to engineer a superbug
• chance that the Black Hat will defeat the White Hats, namely the world's medical and epidemiological networks, who would combat an outbreak with containment, vaccines, antibiotics, etc.
• historical (ir)relevance The only successful past cases of bioterror are the Rajneeshee cult (751 cases, 0 deaths) and the Anthrax mailing (5 deaths). The Soviet-era anthrax bioweapon leak killed another 66.

Some of comments reflect how incredibly fast synthetic biology has advance in 2 decades

The long-now foundation encourages thinking beyond the next Wall-st quarter or even a single life-space. Here, an early bet

"A bioterror or bioerror will lead to one million casualties in a single event within a six month period starting no later than Dec 31 02020."

seems to be firmly on the side of the proponent. Some of the counter-arguments

•  Pool of potential perpetrators: The number of people eager for senseless destruction is small
• Multiply by the fraction with the knowledge, skill, intelligence, and discipline to engineer a superbug
• chance that the Black Hat will defeat the White Hats, namely the world's medical and epidemiological networks, who would combat an outbreak with containment, vaccines, antibiotics, etc.
• historical (ir)relevance The only successful past cases of bioterror are the Rajneeshee cult (751 cases, 0 deaths) and the Anthrax mailing (5 deaths). The Soviet-era anthrax bioweapon leak killed another 66.

Some of comments reflect how incredibly fast synthetic biology has advance in 2 decades