Close
today i learned (til)

The Importance of Heat Stroke Prevention and New Innovations to Help Reduce the Incidence of Heat Stroke!

May 3, 2023

At the Atlanta Science Festival, me and my team members, Ashmita and Claudia, had the pleasure of getting to talk about Heat Stroke to a large audience of individuals and explain the seriousness of it, and why it’s so important to pay so much attention to it and take so much initiative to prevent it. Not only did I enjoy this experience because it gave me experience speaking in public in front of a large group of family members! But, in doing so, I myself actually became more interested in the topic and its political, social, and economic implications. Being a Biomedical Engineer, this topic also hit close to me as it reminded me of a pressing global problem, where the solutions still have significant limitations in their capabilities and how accessible they are all around the world, an issue that I commonly learn how to tackle throughout my degree. In this post, I hope to do two things. I hope to share the information and insight I learned about heat stroke with those who were unable to come to the Atlanta Science Festival. Second of all, I hope I can share with you some of the ways I have thought about solving this pressing problem of Heat Stroke and my thought process to go about solving it!

First of all, many of you are probably wondering, haven’t we all dealt with Heat Stroke? After all, Atlanta is perpetually hot all the time! Heck, it’s just the beginning of May and it already feels like it’s 140 degrees. However, as miserable as that might have been, I promise you that that was not Heat Stroke! What you likely dealt with was Heat Exhaustion, which is extremely uncomfortable, but I promise you that it is not nearly as bad as Heat Stroke! With Heat Exhaustion, at least your homeostatic mechanisms are still working. You know your Homeostatic Mechanisms, the ones that ensure that your body is still in balance, even with changes in the environment to prevent you from developing diseases or dying?! Do you remember how, for instance, when you have gone and exercised quite a bit or you have been outside in the hot sun for some time, you have sweat quite a bit? These are examples of your homeostatic mechanisms kicking in, so you do not have a detrimental response to these environmental changes. The problem, though, is that like everything in life, these mechanisms designed to protect you can fail. Eventually, the hypothalamus, which is responsible for maintaining this homeostasis gets worn out. When that happens, you are basically exposed to this significantly increasing temperature, without any defense mechanism to fight back (Garcia 6). At that point, you are essentially overheating like a computer which is something that can lead to significant consequences, including death, which I will discuss as we go forward!

So now that you know the difference, the next thing that you are probably doing is, what can we do to better deal with the increasing incidence of Heat Stroke in our society? First of all, healthcare providers in our society have to do a better job of treating Heat Stroke with the same level of urgency as other critical illnesses and have to treat it more like diseases, such as Appendicitis, where you will immediately die if you do not get the necessary surgery. This is extremely similar to that. In the case of Heat stroke, not getting treatment immediately can lead to muscle, kidney, heart and even brain damage. The other side of this argument is that more effort has to be taken by the individual to prevent the detrimental consequences of heat stroke and take early action before it is too late, and there are significant, everlasting effects. Simple steps may seem inconvenient, but they can ensure prevention of the worst outcomes from heat stroke. For instance, steps, such as drinking enough fluids, looking out for health related problems with medications, applying sunscreen, and avoidinging overworking in the heat can go a long way. Additionally, significantly more funding has to be spent by the government in investing in the protective equipment necessary to effectively prevent heat stroke as investing money in vaccines, and treatments for other diseases. While two solutions, besides just protective equipment, Neck Fan and the Ice Pack, have gone a long way in attempting to prevent and mitigate Heat stroke by helping to constantly blow cold air around a person’s neck, so as to help that person cool off and bring their body temperature down and reducing body temperature by promoting the contraction of blood vessels; thereby, ensuring that joints are less stiff and that muscle spasms are less likely to occur, these solutions have limitations in the long-term. Eventually, an issue will arise with long-term use of these interventions and something more will need to be done to prevent a significant rise in temperature in just a short period of time. This is especially true for individuals who are in jobs that exposes them to significant amounts of heat on a chronic basis (Kim 4). Additionally, while current PPE are effective in preventing certain infections, they also add to the problem of heat exhaustion and heat stroke (Steps to Put on Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).” World Health Organization, World Health Organization).

This is where research from Georgia Tech and other universities in this area has come to extremely significant use in helping to create longer-lasting and more effective solutions. The solution from Georgia Tech researchers resulted from a way of thinking that was completely outside the box of the problem, but got to the heart of what was necessary! Tech researchers have found that with the creation of a sensor system, through the utilization of a cloud based sensor system, not only can heat stroke be treated effectively, but its incidence can be significantly reduced to begin with (GTRI Helps Develop Wearable Sensor System to Prevent Heat Injuries among Soldiers). Trust me, this technology is way too much for me to understand! However, the gist is that researchers will be able to obtain information about changes in soldiers’ temperatures over significantly large distances. Too large of a heat increase in too short a time will still be a problem. Make no mistake! However, the hope is that if a rapid heat increase is detected before it becomes an extreme issue, a soldier can get the help that they need to prevent complications (Foy 2). This is especially true with the use of local networks, which should be able to tell a soldier whether there are any soldiers in close proximity to them that can assist them. In the long-term, I hope that I can build upon this work to create an internal cooling mechanism to bring down the temperature and a method to help predict baseline normal temperature, based on the thickness of the suit and the environment an individual is working in. For now, though, I hope I have at least been able to better provide insight into why Heat Stroke is such a big problem and why it is one that both more individual and societal effort is needed to solve!

Citations:

  1. Akins, Anna. “GTRI Helps Develop Wearable Sensor System to Prevent Heat Injuries among Soldiers.” Institute Relations, https://gov.gatech.edu/node/515.
  2. Cecile Garcia, Operations Manager. “Feeling (Not so) Hot: Heat-Related Conditions and Illnesses.” Blog, Joffe Emergency Services, 14 June 2019, https://blog.joffeemergencyservices.com/event-medical-services/feeling-not-so-hot-heat-related-conditions-and-illnesses. 
  3. “Steps to Put on Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).” World Health Organization, World Health Organization, https://www.who.int/bangladesh/emergencies/coronavirus-disease-%28covid-19%29-update/steps-to-put-on-personal-protective-equipment-%28ppe%29. 
  4. Kim, Siyeon, et al. “Frequency of Firefighters’ Heat-Related Illness and Its Association with Removing Personal Protective Equipment and Working Hours.” Industrial Health, U.S. National Library of Medicine, 4 June 2019, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6546580/. 
  5. Foy, Kylie. “New Device Detects Heat Strain in Military Trainees.” MIT Lincoln Laboratory, https://www.ll.mit.edu/news/new-device-detects-heat-strain-military-trainees.

 

0Likes
About Author

4th year Biomedical Engineering Student at Georgia Tech, looking to go into the Premed track.

You May Also Like

West Village Dining Hall and Eighth Street Apartments South in the background.
today i learned (til)
Written on the Walls
today i learned (til)
The Psychology of Fear and Why We Seek it Out
The Tile Game
today i learned (til)
How to become an expert at 2048!
today i learned (til)
Forged in Fire: The Discovery of Bronze

Your journey starts here! Let’s talk!

ThemeRex © 2026. All rights reserved.
  Timothy Durham was convicted of rape when a test showed his DNA genotype matched the DNA recovered from the crime scene. Eye witnesses testified that Durham was in a different state at the time of the incident, but he wasn’t exonerated from his 3000 year sentence until follow up DNA analysis showed that the preliminary forensic analysis used in the trial was misinterpreted (Thomas et al.). DNA testing serves an invaluable part in our criminal justice system, but it comes with complications and bias that can lead to wrongful convictions and misinformed juries.  

Background:

Forensic genetics aims to identify the origin of a biological sample. It can be traced back to Karl Landsteiner who discovered human ABO blood groups. With blood groups, suspects could be eliminated based on their blood type. For example, if a suspect had type A blood and there was type B blood left at the scene by the perpetrator, the investigators could rule out the suspect. Unfortunately, the reverse didn’t work. If the suspect and perpetrator both had the same blood type, it can’t be concluded that the suspect was guilty. Blood identifiers evolved into 8 distinct categories which improved the ability to eliminate suspects, but could only conclude that (if the system matched) it might be the perpetrator or this person might be related to the perpetrator (Jobling and Gill). The field evolved in the 1980s with the discovery of Minisatellites, lines of repetitive DNA that don’t encode proteins. Minisatellite patterns in DNA create what we know today as the DNA fingerprint, and it has a much higher accuracy rate than previous methods (Augustyn et al.). Around the same time, a breakthrough for victims of sexual assault was discovered. In the case of assault, bodily fluids of both the victim and the assaulter can get mixed. A process called differential lysis was created which could selectively increase the concentration of sperm in a fluid sample thereby allowing for accurate DNA testing (Jobling and Gill). Forensics evolved to use single-locus probe testing after several years because of its ease of interpretation. It looked at specific minisatellites that had high variability between subjects. This was the first DNA-based method to be used in a criminal investigation. Two murder homicides from several years apart were connected using DNA evidence. The evidence was then used to exonerate an innocent man, and the guilty party was found when he tried to evade mandatory DNA testing for all men in the small town. His guilt was then reinforced when the DNA profiles matched, and he gave a confession (Jobling and Gill). Finding DNA at a crime scene doesn’t guarantee that you’ll find a murderer. There are issues with non-pure samples and limited samples that make DNA work difficult, and accreditation of facilities and new techniques and take time (Jobling and Gill).  

Subjectivity of DNA Interpretation:

In a 2009 publication, the National Academy of Science discusses the possibility for subjective influence in lab based forensics. The interpretation bias happens in complex cases where, for example, there could be a mixture of DNA. A study published in 2011 looked specifically at this issue. A gang rape happened in Georgia, and the mixture in DNA from the case was used to prosecute one suspect after another suspect took a plea bargain to testify against him. With DNA mixtures, there are three possible conclusions: suspect excluded, suspect cannot be excluded, and inconclusive. If the suspect is excluded, it means that there’s little to no possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. If the suspect cannot be excluded, it means that there’s a possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. In the trial, the DNA examiners who knew the context of the case concluded that the suspect being prosecuted could not be excluded. The 2011 study gave the DNA evidence from this case and the DNA profiles of the suspects to 17 forensic examiners. These examiners had no context of the case, and they all worked independently. Of the 17, only 1 came to the same conclusion (suspect cannot be excluded) as the examiners who knew the context of the case. Twelve of the 17 concluded that the suspect who was prosecuted and convicted had no relation to the DNA found in the sample. Not only does this show that subjectivity occurs due to the context of the case, but the 17 examiners came up with different findings based on their past experiences meaning that not all DNA analysis is objective. Some organizations like the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods say that quantitative statistical evidence should be presented with every categorical conclusion, but the US doesn’t require this (Dror and Hampikian).

False Positives:

There are two categories that cause wrongful identification in a DNA report: coincidental matches and false positives. Coincidental matches are DNA matches between two unrelated people. The probability of these matches is about 1 to 500,000 for white individuals and about 1 to 350,000 for black individuals. This small probability of coincidental matches makes people feel confident in DNA evidence. False positives, on the other hand, are matches between DNA and test DNA that result from issues in the forensics lab. There have been multiple cases of forensics labs accidentally switching victim and suspected rapist DNA which lead to convictions that were later overturned when the lab realized the error. There are also cases of misreading or misunderstanding a sample. In a case from 1993, a man was convicted of rape because someone interpreted a mixed sample of victim and perpetrator DNA as an individual sample. The conviction was again overturned. To prevent false convictions, retesting DNA is allowed, but it’s not an efficient solution. Many people are pushing for statistical information on the probability of false positives, so that the jurors can make accurate judgements based on DNA evidence (Thomas et al.).  

Conclusion:

DNA analysis is a useful tool for the criminal justice system, but subjectivity can be an issue in forensic testing. To combat wrongful convictions, there are organizations like The Innocence Project who use DNA testing to free the innocent, but reformed forensic testing standards should be put in place to prevent subjectivity and to ensure juries are correctly informed during trials. https://www.innocenceproject.org/    

Citation:

Augustyn , Adam, et al. “DNA Finerprinting.” Encyclopedia Britannica , 26 Apr. 2018, www.britannica.com/science/DNA-fingerprinting#ref153186. Dror, Itiel E., and Greg Hampikian. “Subjectivity and Bias in Forensic DNA Mixture Interpretation.” Science & Justice, vol. 51, no. 4, 2011, pp. 204–208., doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004. Jobling, Mark A., and Peter Gill. “Encoded Evidence: DNA in Forensic Analysis.” Nature Reviews: Genetics, vol. 5, no. 10, Oct. 2004, pp. 739–751., doi:10.1038/nrg1455. Thompson, William C, et al. “How the Probability of a False Positive Affects the Value of DNA Evidence.” Journal of Forensic Sciences, vol. 48, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 1–8., doi:10.1520/jfs2001171.