Ramblings of an old Doc

 

This really isn’t “Personal Computing”, but I don’t think the appropriate Forum cross posts from JU. However, I’m not going to try to figure it out.

Honestly, I’ve waited for this for a decade… more… since college, really.

I’d been waiting for the weekend to publish this. I can’t. It’s too big. It is to Medicine what “Dark Matter” is to modern physics.

Medicine has been progressing rapidly, but no one could really explain the effect of the genes whose alleles (mutant genes) caused many complex diseases. Why should some function and others not, and what controls the sequence of function?

Since 2003, the “Encode” project has been running, and the amount of data generated is truly huge. “Encode” is the project which deciphered (to a large, but not complete extent) what goes on in the nucleus of cells. It involved 440 scientists and 32 labs around the world.

It turns out that what appeared to be “junk’ DNA wasn’t junk at all, and that 80% of it is quite active. These small DNA sequences were thought to be junk because they were located at quite a distance from the genes they were found (now) to turn on and off.

To understand this very complex picture, you have to realize that each cell I’m discussing has the ‘normal’ (2N) amount of chromosomes. That means I’m not talking about eggs, sperm or red blood cells. The first two have N chromosomes (half the number) and red blood cells have none.

The amount of DNA in the 2N cells if stretched out would be a strand 10 feet long. Obviously then, it’s all balled up tightly in the nuclei of your cells. Now picture this: The ball is not random. It is coiled such that the switches are in very close proximity to the genes they regulate (on and off) as well as to other switches, which they interact with as well. This is a very complex “hair ball”.

So, imagine switches a,b,c and d. In that order they produce (along with the gene cascade and secondary, tertiary , quaternary, etc. switches and genes regulated by them) a liver cell. Thus, the different sequences will determine different DNA folding patterns and proximities. In a different order, a brain cell, and so on. This means there is a hierarchy of switches controlled by hormones and even by “up-ness” or “down-ness”) of cells and by neighboring cells…. It is truly mind boggling, especially when you consider that a cell can be thought of (so we can picture the complexity) as an ocean liner filled completely with machinery on the size order of a Swiss watch.

Take a breather.

Digest that.

So, how many switches are there? About four (4) million.

“The result of the work is an annotated road map of much of this DNA, noting what it is doing and how. It includes the system of switches that, acting like dimmer switches for lights, control which genes are used in a cell and when they are used, and determine, for instance, whether a cell becomes a liver cell or a neuron.” - http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/06/science/far-from-junk-dna-dark-matter-proves-crucial-to-health.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

You all remember “The Human Genome Project”. Think of that as a picture of Earth from space (the “blue marble” picture). This current research has presented the equivalent of “Google Maps”. The latter now shows the roads, restaurants, hospitals, cities and rivers, according to Dr. Eric Lander (Harvard and MIT, Broad Institute).

“In one of the Nature papers, researchers link the gene switches to a range of human diseases — multiple sclerosis, lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn’s disease, celiac disease — and even to traits like height. In large studies over the past decade, scientists found that minor changes in human DNA sequences increase the risk that a person will get those diseases. But those changes were in the junk, now often referred to as the dark matter — they were not changes in genes — and their significance was not clear. The new analysis reveals that a great many of those changes alter gene switches and are highly significant.” – ibid

The basis of many diseases and the future attacks on these diseases will be in the switches. That means Cancer, as well.

The parts which haven’t been figured out yet are the next phase of “Encode”.

Hope this has given some mind expansion as well as…well… hope.

Just to add some 'pepper' - What determines the "up-ness" and "down-ness"? What was most fundamental to all of this ... allowed it all to occur? The Higgs-Boson. It allows matter to aggregate, and form gravity, without which there could be no "up" or "down". 

Sources:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/sep/05/genes-genome-junk-dna-encode

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/06/science/far-from-junk-dna-dark-matter-proves-crucial-to-health.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all


Comments (Page 2)
4 Pages1 2 3 4 
on Sep 07, 2012

Not always does progress in disease diagnosis and treatment translate into longer life... it might reduce cancer deaths and/or suffering and attendant expense, but not death due to other reasons... 

on Sep 07, 2012

Plus, we all have built-in expiration dates.  Human beings, like all organisms, are designed to die.  Death is not a bug, it's a feature.

 

on Sep 07, 2012

Cauldyth
  The best we can hope for is a cure for colon cancer, a cure for breast cancer, a cure for pancreatic cancer, etc.  What I mean is that each type of cancer is different from the others in how it operates, and it's highly unlikely there will be a magic bullet that treats all of them.  Each form of cancer will need to be studied and addressed separately.
 

I think this says it all. If this helps even a little to find a cure for just one of these then it is everything that Doc says it is and more.

on Sep 07, 2012

Population growth concerns me.  People aren't dying like they used to and supporting all of these folks has a cost.  I'm not sure that the cost will be affordable long term.

Not to worry, Zubaz.  When overcrowding becomes an issue, war and famine have a way of thinning out the herd.

on Sep 07, 2012

Wizard1956
Not to worry, Zubaz.  When overcrowding becomes an issue, war and famine have a way of thinning out the herd.
[e digicons]:'([/e]

on Sep 07, 2012

Wizard1956

Quoting Zubaz, reply 15Population growth concerns me.  People aren't dying like they used to and supporting all of these folks has a cost.  I'm not sure that the cost will be affordable long term.

Not to worry, Zubaz.  When overcrowding becomes an issue, war and famine have a way of thinning out the herd.
 A plague (insert virulent virus/bacterial) agent helps the process along.

on Sep 07, 2012

Cauldyth
Plus, we all have built-in expiration dates. Human beings, like all organisms, are designed to die. Death is not a bug, it's a feature.

Death by old age is definitely a bug.  The sooner science removes that from our code, the better.

on Sep 07, 2012


Quoting Wizard1956, reply 19Not to worry, Zubaz.  When overcrowding becomes an issue, war and famine have a way of thinning out the herd. [e digicons]:'([/e]

And typos. Don't forget typos.

 

on Sep 07, 2012

SpardaSon21

Quoting Cauldyth, reply 18Plus, we all have built-in expiration dates. Human beings, like all organisms, are designed to die. Death is not a bug, it's a feature.

Death by old age is definitely a bug.  The sooner science removes that from our code, the better.

I assure you it's not.  Immortality for members of a species means the doom of that species.

There is an upper limit to the population of a species that can be supported by their environment.  The lower the death rate of a species, the slower its reproduction rate must become to avoid overpopulation.  If a species were to evolve to never die of old age, and the only death was by injury or disease, then it would need to have an incredibly low rate of reproduction.  A rate of reproduction that low would mean the rate at which the species can adapt to changes in their environment or new diseases, etc. slows to a crawl.  They just go extinct instead of adapting.

Nature "discovered" long ago that turnover in a population is necessary for that species to survive, and the only way to accomplish turnover is through planned obsolescence (i.e. death).  Any species without sufficient planned obsolescence would be ultimately wiped out and replaced by species with more "agile" adaptive ability (to borrow another term from software development).

 

on Sep 07, 2012

Eh, I'm pretty sure that by the time mankind achieves biological immortality chances are we'll have some way to adapt our bodies to the situations we need them to adapt to.  Plus living in only one environment (Earth in this case) sucks and needs to stop.

on Sep 07, 2012

Ironically, Cauldyth's views are equally subject to abuse.  One day we'll need a global government that "set's lifespans" just as in China now they set birth limits.

After that we'll get to "merit values" and start ranking people for social value--letting them have more time while others have less.

Look at human history--who would you possibly trust with that power?

As to the "we're designed to die"--that statement only works as a cold assessment.  It has no value or benefit at all when said to someone who's child is dying of cancer or multiple sclerosis or to a child who will lose their parents.

Humanity and personal life always have to be valued higher than "practicality" or you will lose humanity in the process--guaranteed.

on Sep 07, 2012

Oh, my comments weren't meant to address the issue of what we should actively do going forward.  I am fundamentally opposed to anything like China's One Child Policy, let alone any sort of Logan's Run scenario of mandated death!  I hope that goes without saying...

Similarly, yes, human ingenuity may very well eventually allow us to be effectively immortal without dire consequences.  My comments were merely meant to address whether or not death is a biological error, or whether it's something nature selected for because it's been important to the success of species.  It's the latter.

Edit: Nature's also selected many of us to be lactose intolerant, because consumption of milk by adult mammals is generally unheard of, but I'm still happy to use modern technology (i.e. medicine) to work around that annoying design feature.

 

on Sep 07, 2012

True, for a species trying to get an evolutionary edge in its a handy feature, but for our species biological death is rapidly approaching "unwanted bug" status, which is what my initial post was trying to say.

on Sep 07, 2012

Population growth concerns me. People aren't dying like they used to

I'm doing what I can...but I'm only one man!  Decisions decisions. Come on the rest of you old farts!

on Sep 07, 2012

LOL (at the above).  

I didn't think you wre advocating longevity councils Caudyth.  No worries.

This is why we need space development.  We could live long lives if we had a frontier for people to settle.

"A new life awaits you in the offworld colonies!"

4 Pages1 2 3 4