Genetic coding and the human experience ...

[Dan From Smithville]

The general premise is that these traits are necessitated due to environmental stressors.

The traits exist already and were inherited from the parents or resulted from mutations in the germ cells of the parents.

An athlete's ancestry would very likely show some need and environmental stressors which necessitated the traits and abilities.

That is a bit different than what you are suggesting. An athletic population would have had genetic changes occur over time in the population and if the environment supported those changes, they would become fixed in the population. But an extent population didn't have a community wide series of transformation events that resulted in concurrent genetic changes. The population has the same genes it started with.

That's the general premise. The hope and what i find most intriguing is our ability to project future environments and to be able to consciously prepare for them in order to help ensure our survival rates.

We don't consciously alter our genes in preparation for perceived changes in the environment. If some of members of the population have a genome that provides a benefit to a new environment, then that environment will favor them and they will have a greater success at reproducing. Inevitably, some of the genes that were beneficial in the prior environment may be lost. But in neither of those events was the trait willed into existence or lost due to lack of interest.

This could ease the burden and better prepare our descendants for future stressors that would necessitate the changes, ensuring greater survival.

Having a convincing expectation of an environmental change would not naturally result in the formation of new genes to meet those perceived changes. A group of people could decide to get together out of a knowledge that they possess genes that would be favored in the expected change, but that would be a breeding experiment artificially selecting genes that already would be known to exist based on the phenotypic expression.

The bottom line is, that while an interesting idea, it is an old idea that has never had the support of evidence. Random mutation and environmental selection acting on populations is still the model supported by the evidence.

 

[Balthazzar]

This may help to better understand if I can explain it well enough.

The genes that a person has is their genotype are inherited from their parents with about 50-100 hundred mutations that didn't come from the folks and are novel to the individual. Some of these may have a benefit or may even be detrimental, but most will be neutral.

We have a genotype that is our individual gene sequence. These genes are expressed in what is us as the genotype. The expression of genes or the genotype has some plasticity to it. We change as we age for instance. Though some of that change is regulated and dependent on the timing of expression, but that is more detailed and time consuming to go through in a simple explanation. And honestly, beyond the scope of a mere entomologist to explain well. However, what you have been discussing is alterations to the phenotype which has some plasticity and can respond to the environment (training for instance is an environmental change) without a corresponding change to the genotype.

Great athletes have the same genes they started life with. Their training has been on the phenotype and the results are the enhancement of that. Just as changes that occur with aging are examples of the same sort of plasticity different only in the basis for the change. Working out, eating right and maintaining optimum activity levels can alter or slow the inevitable results of that natural plasticity to a degree. A lot I hope as I get older. But my genes are not going to change.

They would quite possibly over a multi-generational continuum. We all have the basic gene structures. Our genetic sequencing or coding differs, and this is due to our environmental influences over multiple generations. An ongoing need and stressor would work out our physiology as well as our neurological functions. Its fair for you to disagree with my suggestions. I would rather put to test the theory over multiple generations than reject the potential based on a "It hasn't been documented yet", attitude.

I'll exist this thread on that note.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

They would quite possibly over a multi-generational continuum. We all have the basic gene structures. Our genetic sequencing or coding differs, and this is due to our environmental influences over multiple generations. An ongoing need and stressor would work out our physiology as well as our neurological functions. Its fair for you to disagree with my suggestions. I would rather put to test the theory over multiple generations than reject the potential based on a "It hasn't been documented yet", attitude.

I'll exist this thread on that note.

What you are suggesting is not observed. What is observed is that the environment selects existing genes in a population. It doesn't alter them so that an organism born with one genotype acquires a different genotype dependent on the environment or how it approaches that environment.

People that live in deserts, mountains, jungles, or pretty much anywhere have traits that provide a benefit in those environments, because the environment acted on the genome of their populations in the past and selected those individuals with traits that benefited them to the environment. The population genomes are not the result of changes to individual genetics out of personal interest that manifested in those individuals during their lifetimes.

Stress impacts physiology and the various responses arise from the plasticity of the phenotype from a fixed genotype.

I appreciate that you brought the idea up and have enjoyed discussing it with you. It is just an idea that may be new to you, but one that has been expressed before and even famously in some cases. I wouldn't be helping increase the general understanding to agree with something I know is unsupported however historical or fascinating the idea may be. My rejection of the idea is based on the facts, but my interest here is still real and appreciative of your thoughts.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

They would quite possibly over a multi-generational continuum. We all have the basic gene structures. Our genetic sequencing or coding differs, and this is due to our environmental influences over multiple generations. An ongoing need and stressor would work out our physiology as well as our neurological functions. Its fair for you to disagree with my suggestions. I would rather put to test the theory over multiple generations than reject the potential based on a "It hasn't been documented yet", attitude.

I'll exist this thread on that note.

I don't know how easy it is to get a copy, but a book that you may find interesting and useful is The Theory of Evolution by John Maynard Smith. It is a general introduction to the theory and the evidence the theory explains. There is a section on adaptations that you might find interesting and useful. In my opinion, the book is a generally very good explanation of the theory. There are other popular accounts explaining the theory of evolution to a general audience that might also serve. Why Evolution is True by Jerry Coyne, What Evolution Is by Ernst Mayr, Evolution: The Triumph of an Idea by Carl Zimmer, Only a Theory: Evolution and the Battle for America's Soul by Kenneth R. Miller or Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters by Donald Prothero. Of these, I have not read Prothero's book, but I understand it is very good.

 

[Heyo]

The prospect of a conscious effort to produce a desired genetic trait in our offspring seems a very amicable thing to pursue as a parent.

I know that you have bowed out of this conversation, but I have created a new one regarding that exact thought.
Eugenics Revisited

 

[wellwisher]

Humans being processors of our unique genetic code seems a relevant position. Given our conscious awareness and intellect, is it a stretch to suggest that we are able to produce specific traits through conscious effort to manipulate our genetic code processing? Traits like balance, skill set ability, motor functions - from art to tai chi, etc. could be a result of daily activity and could potentially be self-coded consciously.

What do you think?

I belief that the human brain has evolved, beyond the genetic coding; Human Consciousness. Humans are not exactly a very good product of natural evolution, in the sense of losing our natural instincts, in favor of learned knowledge and choice. This is different from our ape relatives. Natural selection has far fewer sick critters needing constant care like humans. The fact that the medicine industry grows each year reflects reverse evolution in a natural sense; more and more dependence on man made prosthesis.

As a modern example, transgender implies willfully wanting to go against the DNA; biological sex based on DNA, One cannot willfully make the DNA change, so you can metamorphosis into the opposite sex. That would be proof of concept. However, humans can use science and technology, to get you part way there; cosmetic change. The artificial drugs fed into the natural body, can alter natural genetic expression, but these do not alter the DNA, even if saying biological sex is taboo; DNA has not changed, except via human willful standards of PC reinforced with legal muscle.

I tend to think the stories of Genesis are really about the change, when the human brain exceeded its genetic platform. The animal body is still attached to the DNA, by the human mind is no longer natural and instinctive like expected of DNA; lion or goat. Humans can make choices based on external knowledge instead of innate instinctive knowledge; DNA. That new type of creature; modern human is not very old; 6-10K years.

The brain and mind does not change the DNA sequence. However, mind and matter can have an impact on genetic expression. For example, genes can be methylated or acetylated, thereby making them more or less often packed; closed or open for business. Also what are called junk genes are actually part of the configurational potential of the coding genes. This can be impacted within neurons.

As an analogy, for so-called junk genes, when enzymes are folded and packed, there is a final active site. The active side is dependent on the entire folded protein package, and not just the surface site. The entire package helps to set the stage; position, catalytic potential and rebound. The so-called junk genes are similar, for the coding genes= active site, setting the context for their expression. If cut off all the so-called junk, the DNA would not work, anymore, than if we get rid of the enzyme body.

The brain, via the nervous system and extensive nerve connections, near almost all the cells of the human body, plays a role in cellular differentiation control; smart cells. Neurons are unique in that they never replicate after a certain point early in life. They are eternal cells. Their main effect appears to be to control cellular proliferation, in the rest of the cells. They impose a "do not replicate" onto other cells by their own nature, unless there are other control cues needed; hormones.

If there is an injury and nerve endings are cut or damaged, local cell control is gone, and the control cells can replicate until the nerves are restored and rewired; skin cells replicate after a cut. The brain appears to have a backup copy of the body image; nervous system feedback. It will rejuvenate toward that ideal image, within limits; nerve, cells and blood supply.

The brain, by being the top of the control system, and it having consciousness as a feature that can fire neurons; think and remember, consciousness can have an impact on the control system, with most of the impact wired for muscle energy and control. We can even cause muscles to build or proliferate; muscle head and exercise.

My theory is the best place for the brain to make even more drastic changes in the DNA will be gamete cells, especially female. The formation of the ovum is like the equilibrium product of a 4-D organic printer in water, with ovum DNA in water equilibrium with that design. The shuffling of genes after fertilization is the movement toward this new equilibrium design; unique offspring.

Some form of cancer start as body cells, that leave the nerve control system; uncontrolled proliferation. Cancer does not have a nerve system for control. Conceptually, you might be able to implant live nerves, from the person's body, into their cancer to inhibit it; no side effects. Cancer also seems to suggest the nerve system is about resisting proliferation and potential change; maximize health.

 

[Balthazzar]

I belief that the human brain has evolved, beyond the genetic coding; Human Consciousness. Humans are not exactly a very good product of natural evolution, in the sense of losing our natural instincts, in favor of learned knowledge and choice. This is different from our ape relatives. Natural selection has far fewer sick critters needing constant care like humans. The fact that the medicine industry grows each year reflects reverse evolution in a natural sense; more and more dependence on man made prosthesis.

As a modern example, transgender implies willfully wanting to go against the DNA; biological sex based on DNA, One cannot willfully make the DNA change, so you can metamorphosis into the opposite sex. That would be proof of concept. However, humans can use science and technology, to get you part way there; cosmetic change. The artificial drugs fed into the natural body, can alter natural genetic expression, but these do not alter the DNA, even if saying biological sex is taboo; DNA has not changed, except via human willful standards of PC reinforced with legal muscle.

I tend to think the stories of Genesis are really about the change, when the human brain exceeded its genetic platform. The animal body is still attached to the DNA, by the human mind is no longer natural and instinctive like expected of DNA; lion or goat. Humans can make choices based on external knowledge instead of innate instinctive knowledge; DNA. That new type of creature; modern human is not very old; 6-10K years.

The brain and mind does not change the DNA sequence. However, mind and matter can have an impact on genetic expression. For example, genes can be methylated or acetylated, thereby making them more or less often packed; closed or open for business. Also what are called junk genes are actually part of the configurational potential of the coding genes. This can be impacted within neurons.

As an analogy, for so-called junk genes, when enzymes are folded and packed, there is a final active site. The active side is dependent on the entire folded protein package, and not just the surface site. The entire package helps to set the stage; position, catalytic potential and rebound. The so-called junk genes are similar, for the coding genes= active site, setting the context for their expression. If cut off all the so-called junk, the DNA would not work, anymore, than if we get rid of the enzyme body.

The brain, via the nervous system and extensive nerve connections, near almost all the cells of the human body, plays a role in cellular differentiation control; smart cells. Neurons are unique in that they never replicate after a certain point early in life. They are eternal cells. Their main effect appears to be to control cellular proliferation, in the rest of the cells. They impose a "do not replicate" onto other cells by their own nature, unless there are other control cues needed; hormones.

If there is an injury and nerve endings are cut or damaged, local cell control is gone, and the control cells can replicate until the nerves are restored and rewired; skin cells replicate after a cut. The brain appears to have a backup copy of the body image; nervous system feedback. It will rejuvenate toward that ideal image, within limits; nerve, cells and blood supply.

The brain, by being the top of the control system, and it having consciousness as a feature that can fire neurons; think and remember, consciousness can have an impact on the control system, with most of the impact wired for muscle energy and control. We can even cause muscles to build or proliferate; muscle head and exercise.

My theory is the best place for the brain to make even more drastic changes in the DNA will be gamete cells, especially female. The formation of the ovum is like the equilibrium product of a 4-D organic printer in water, with ovum DNA in water equilibrium with that design. The shuffling of genes after fertilization is the movement toward this new equilibrium design; unique offspring.

Some form of cancer start as body cells, that leave the nerve control system; uncontrolled proliferation. Cancer does not have a nerve system for control. Conceptually, you might be able to implant live nerves, from the person's body, into their cancer to inhibit it; no side effects. Cancer also seems to suggest the nerve system is about resisting proliferation and potential change; maximize health.

I read an article about adhd and how it it may have potentially developed. While foraging for food, the berries from a bush were picked until they became more difficult to locate, at which point the persons moved on to the next bush to pick berries. The alternative would be to continue picking from the same bush until the berries were depleted. Apparently, it was a survival technique and speed oriented for increased production in the harvesting of berries. This technique apparently became part of the genetic coding which translates into adhd in our modern world. Go figure.

 

[wellwisher]

I read an article about adhd and how it it may have potentially developed. While foraging for food, the berries from a bush were picked until they became more difficult to locate, at which point the persons moved on to the next bush to pick berries. The alternative would be to continue picking from , and if
the same bush until the berries were depleted. Apparently, it was a survival technique and speed oriented for increased production in the harvesting of berries. This technique apparently became part of the genetic coding which translates into adhd in our modern world. Go figure.

What this mechanism suggests is a directed change on the DNA, led by the brain; smart tissue. The action of picking berries and figuring this out as useful, is more about the brain than the body. A random genetic approach; mutation in the DNA, that can ignore the brain, would not care if that person was smart or dumb or can use the genetic change, that will need the brain.

If would throw the genetic dice and if the coin falls on snake eyes, the brain may not be able to use the change; Ground Hogs day. It goes back to step one of learning, with the change unconscious. But, if the change on the DNA was directed by the brain, then the next child has a better chance of picking up the violin and playing at age 2. The violin was invented in 1530; many generations. The intricacies that will be needed are prewired within the cerebellum of the brain; at birth; coordination and timing (hand, eye and ear). If that wiring is already there, it can express the new change closer to immediately; targeted change.

The current theory for DNA is very organic centric. DNA is shown in almost all textbooks, without the water, which is critical to its function. Dehydrated DNA, as shown in most textbooks is not bioactive. This bias is due to too much black box theory. As you add water, the DNA double helix forms and the increasing degree of hydration, determines the final configuration of the DNA, with beta-DNA the most hydrated and the most common form of DNA. The addition of water is powering up the DNA, since DNA evolved in water. Water can also manipulate the DNA at the nanoscale. DNA does not work in other solvents, but is tuned only to water.

DNA is a very hydrated molecule, meaning lot of water is chemically attached to the DNA. This water will not shake off in a centrifuge. Water and DNA forms lots of hydrogen bonds, with DNA and water almost merging into each other to make a composite material that is bio-active. Below are the base pairs of DNA with the chemically attached water inside the DNA double helix. All the bases were designed to have places, where water attaches chemically.

This water self connects and then forms a double helix of water inside the major and minor grooves of the DNA double helix. Textbook pictures of the DNA double helix rarely show this, even though it is essential to DNA function. They still use black box water; ignore the obvious. However, water has a logic to it, that makes life much easier to understand at any level; life in one variable (A implies B).

The brain, neurons and nervous system move sodium and potassium ion through the water-organic interfaces and can tweak the DNA via its water, though equilibrium effects.. The DNA inside neurons see the most impact of the brain; epigenetic changes. This can tweak the DNA configurational potential and shapes; expression. My guess is that even the junk genes can store data.

 

[wellwisher]

When mother cells finish their cells cycles, their DNA will pack with packing protein, to form condensed chromosomes. This packing into condensed chromosomes is connected to the water. It can understood as analogous to a system of water and oil. If we mix water and oil and shake, it will form an emulsion. An emulsion blends, but stops short, of forming a true solution. The water and oil do not fully dissolve into each other like water and sugar. They get closer and closer with smaller and smaller bubbles. The emulsion is not stabilized like a solution, but creates more and more surface tension, the more we shake, and keeps resisting dissolving.

If we stop shaking, and left by itself, it will begin to bead up into bigger and bigger water and oil bubbles, and separate all the way back to two layers; oil on top of the water. It is reversible the same way each time, all based on natural potentials; lowest surface area and surface tension. Two layers is minimal surface contact area and minimal surface tension.

The DNA, by itself is very soluble in water. The DNA will only pack into the double helix to form its lowest surface tension shape in water. This shields the oily sugars and bases pairs from the bulk water. Once the mother cell begins to add lots of packing protein, these packing protein will add surface tension, like suddenly mixing oil into the cellular water. But unlike oil, these packing protein will only partially self bind and separate out. The packing protein groupings cannot further self bind, all the way to just two layers, like the oil and water. Instead they have to lower surface tension by merging with the DNA.

The entire complex lower the packing protein surface area and surface tension, via the DNA packing levels, all the way to what we call condensed chromosomes. This final shapes will minimize the surface tension of the water. Water runs this shows. This sweet spot is always the same; minimal energy, and therefore is very reproducible; this water and "oil" separation effect always looks the same.

The problem is, since the condensed chromosomes are now so stable in water, there is no need to further change, nor can it self open, without increasing the surface tension. Nature has its own little agitators, which are unpacking enzymes. These can fight against the water trying maintain this lowest surface tension state. This fight is very useful, since we have two opposing forces, which makes systematic unpacking directed and avoids random effects. Conceptually, since we release packing protein, when we reverse the packing, we will add surface tension to the water, causing the open genes will want to repack. This is common with coding genes transcribed and then repacked. It is based on equilibrium between surface tension states and the enzymatic unpacking complexes. It is very tug of war precise.

If we wanted to unpack the DNA, and leave it open, there are two ways. We can remove the surface tension effect of the packing protein, as it is released, by making these protein go to recycle; different path for equilibrium. The DNA is fine all open up in water. It only packed to help the packing protein.

The other way would be to change the equilibrium cellular and nucleus water potential, so the water can handle more surface tension at equilibrium; stable semi open DNA states. This is key to multicellular differentiation induction using the same DNA for all cells. We dial in the water potential and a unique dynamic DNA packing shape appears, for each cell type; cell equilibrium. The junk genes allows this to occur in a more 3-D ways instead of just linear. This is assisted by the centromere which does not easily unpack. This is configurational anchor or zone of potential would create highest surface tension. It I used to resist dialing in too far push from the extreme side.

These cellar differentiation control, equilibrium shapes, can be controlled via cellular ion pumping and the sodium and potassium ion balances. Sodium ions are Kosmotropic meaning sodium ions can create more order in water, than pure water creates for itself. Potassium ions are Chaotropic or create more disorder in water, than pure water creates for itself.

Cells will concentrated potassium ions inside, thereby adding more disorder to the cellular water. The is opposite the way water behaves with surface tension, which creates order. This can offset and compensate for adding DNA unpacking surface tension. This offset will be a function of ion pump budget and efficiency; membrane potential. Neurons at are the top of this food chain; potassium offset, and the presence of nerve tissue near most cells allows some Na+K+ control tweaks, all the way to the DNA shape.

In the early cell cycles, the cell membrane unsaturated to make the membrane more fluid for the eventual separation to two cells. The fluidity has other purposes, one of which is to increases ion pump reversal and lowers the potassium balance; loose membrane reverse easier. With less offset, the cells is more geared to making condensed chromosomes, at equilibrium, to lower the surface tension.

After the division, cell begins to re-saturate the membrane, making it tighter. The ion pump reversal lowers, and the potassium offset builds; the chromosomes start to up open. There are metabolic equilibria connected to the membrane. Today, we have more bells and whistles, but the water sets the foundation, to integrate the increasingly complex equilibrium parts of the water and oil blends.