Comments on: The Ghost in our Genes

By: Epicurus

Epicurus — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:48:00 +0000

lamarckian evolution is wrong and has been wrong for a long time now.

the experiments have been done to show it is wrong.

By: Paul Gloor

Paul Gloor — Sat, 23 Jul 2011 11:48:00 +0000

So perhaps epigenetics is the basis of slow adaptation while random mutation is the basis of speciation… maybe ? With all those disease effects occurring from previous generations exposures, its easy to see how one species would go extinct, and very quickly at that.

By: Fred

Fred — Sat, 28 May 2011 21:20:00 +0000

Random mutation of genes is still valid! Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. The genes are the plans for the organism. The epigenetic molecules are the ‘tweakers’ to enable the organism to learn from its environment & adapt to ensure future survival (unless environmental catastrophe occurs when Natural Selection dominates).
And Occam’s Razor is only valid once you consider ALL facts. We do not have all the facts. Thus in using Occam’s Razor too early in a prognosis we might be barking up the wrong tree completely and have to work back over discarded data, such as Lamarck’s work.

By: Fred

Fred — Sat, 28 May 2011 21:11:00 +0000

It’s true about egg formation in women – that the eggs are formed in utero and are decanted one by one in adulthood – but men produce spermatozoa every day! And what do you know about gene switching of ovum DNA whilst growing/maturing within a woman?
And yes, of course it can have positive changes, and neutral ones, as well as negative changes. It just so happens that the negative ones have been easier to identify. A can of worms has been opened, and I’m glad. It’s about time Lamarck was re-examined (and yes, I know that they’re not the same thing, but there may be a connection).

By: Gary V

Gary V — Wed, 18 May 2011 03:08:00 +0000

Fascinating how genes can miss different generations & you can inherit things from several generations back. Even stress can be passed on.

By: Gary V

Gary V — Wed, 18 May 2011 03:03:00 +0000

An interesting doc from the BBC Horizon team about genetics & how genes can be passed from the mother or father & how the can be switched on or off. Worth watching.

By: Novi

Novi — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 18:06:18 +0000

If I get this documentary right, they present a link between an experience of a parent that can turn on/off a gene and the traits of the child. But this link is ONLY established if the experience of the parent occurs during the development of their germ cells (sperm/egg-cells). So for a mother this would be already when she is in the womb of HER mother and for a father during puberty. Though this is very interesting, the documentary exaggerates immensely by stating ‘any experience in the (grand)parents life can lead to disease in their (grand)children’. Of course this is also highlighting just a tip of the iceberg because I think it is plausable that the epigenetic effect caused by the experience can have positive changes. For example it is known that children that were in the womb during a famine are much more prone to obesitas which, if the famine period persisted, would help the child survive.

By: Emwebb

Emwebb — Thu, 27 Jan 2011 21:31:58 +0000

P. Wynburne – you do not disappoint us at all. This is a documentary that shows us how scientific data is used to present evidence supporting a theory.

Samuel Hahnemann was alive in the 18th and 19th century and anything that he possibly thought up at the time was not put to scientific test. It is irrelevant what particular theory he happened to decide upon – it does not prove that any of his other medical theories were sound. On an aside, homeopathy has been put to scientific test and has repeatedly failed other than having a placebo effect. Not that there is anything wrong with a placebo effect – it just proves the power of the human mind and it would be great if more alternative therapists would accept that as “western” science already does rather than profiting from the vulnerable!

By: liberally.insane

liberally.insane — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 03:56:06 +0000

I have always wondered why mainstream genetics believe that all evolution happens uniquely through random genetic mutations. The whole model is chaotic and gives too much importance to chance. It is in a way religiously anti-religion, or in other words it is religiously trying to disprove the concept of a “deity with a great plan” by attributing everything in our evolution to random chance.

I always believed that the actions and events in our ancestors lives have created our genes. I believed that if a person lives a unhealthy life it will directly affect the life of the offspring. What simpler way can we prove theoretically how, for example, the dark skinned became dark skinned. They lived in an area that was hot and sunny thereby changing the pigment of skin to a darker color. This of course would not happen in one generation but after dozens and dozens of generations you would expect all newborns be darker than the newborns of the 1st or 2nd generations.

Doesn’t this explain genetic evolution more simply than the concept of random mutations of a gene that survived the conditions while the others without this gene died off? Just how fucked up is that of an explanation? According to Occam’s Razor, the simplest explanation for a given phenomenon consider all facts is the best explanation.

By: Tanja

Tanja — Sat, 20 Nov 2010 23:14:53 +0000

I wonder if anyone read Jung’s ideas on collective unconscious, primodial ideas, and archetypes. I think science is slowly starting to support now what he had conceived of many decades ago. Any thoughts?

By: Shana

Shana — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 14:29:43 +0000

I wonder if they will be able to link Autism to Epigenetics as well??

By: iesika

iesika — Sun, 19 Sep 2010 02:25:04 +0000

@ CuriosityKilledTheCat

It’s worse than that, even. Most homeopathic remedies are literally nothing but water – they do not contain a single molecule of the ‘medicine’.

By: CuriosityKilledTheCat

CuriosityKilledTheCat — Sat, 21 Aug 2010 10:24:44 +0000

Homeopathy doesn’t work
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/homeopathy-test/

At the “prescribed concentration” a single drop in the ocean would be about right. What chemical would be useful in that concentration?

By: CuriosityKilledTheCat

CuriosityKilledTheCat — Sat, 21 Aug 2010 10:20:53 +0000

NOVA on PBS did a very similar program

Has identical twins comparing their epigenome, including a pair one with cancer the other without; one with autism the other without. It also has some info about therapy to turn genes off/on.

“the-ghost-in-your-genes” video at isn’t online at PBS but here is the transcript:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/3413_genes.html

and here is the video online:
http://en.sevenload.com/videos/tX02lnf-Nova-The-Ghost-In-Your-Genes-1-6

By: sudheer

sudheer — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 17:09:30 +0000

hi Eric Howe why don’t you take yourself a homeo drug capsicum in a hundred thousand (cm) potency to disprove homeopathy? read organon read materia medica. still if u can’t makeup your mind i can’t help.