It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Reanimated 'Junk' DNA Is Found to Cause Disease

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Reanimated 'Junk' DNA Is Found to Cause Disease


global.nytimes.com

The human genome is riddled with dead genes, fossils of a sort, dating back hundreds of thousands of years — the genome’s equivalent of an attic full of broken and useless junk.

Some of those genes, surprised geneticists reported Thursday, can rise from the dead like zombies, waking up to cause one of the most common forms of muscular dystrophy. This is the first time, geneticists say, that they have seen a dead gene come back to life and cause a disease.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   
This article is of interest for a number of reasons. First of all, it represents a major new development in our understanding of how DNA works. It also has implications for the boundries between life and death. It hints at a subtle, long-term pattern to the way DNA acts, with certain portions perhaps turning on and/or off over very long timeframes. Finally, it raises the mystery of what else may be hidden in the vast amount of so-called "junk DNA" that scientists have been content to consider meaningless.

global.nytimes.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 05:09 PM
link   
I do not think that DNA is junk.

Despite the fact we have no idea what it's purpose is, does not mean it does not have a useful purpose.

Rather than calling it junk dna, we should call it recessive perhaps??

I like that word a bit better. Recessive.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
I do not think that DNA is junk.

Despite the fact we have no idea what it's purpose is, does not mean it does not have a useful purpose.

Rather than calling it junk dna, we should call it recessive perhaps??

I like that word a bit better. Recessive.


I don't, but only for the reason that it is already used by geneticists for something else. I prefer the term "archived".



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 08:22 PM
link   
reply to post by silent thunder
 


Important subject. S&F

My questions:

What's reanimating dead genes?

Could it be something new in our environment?

...If something in the environment is reanimating dead junk genes to cause disease, is it valid to say "It's a genetic disease?"

Does a purely genetic focus take the heat off industry, and ensure more new profits for Big Pharma too? Like a one-size-fits-all blockbuster just might do the trick? While protecting the subsidiaries that manufacture chemicals?


Worth checking out:

www.junkdna.com...



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 09:42 PM
link   
i find it interesting that people assume taht over teh course of thousands of years these various parts of the human DNA stopped working for a reason, and people assume that if you manipulte them to turn back on good thigns wil happen. maybe the reason they are "turned off" is because the people that were born with the genes "turned on" died from horrible diseases.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 09:47 PM
link   
The word zombie being used in this little blirp is most amusing.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogerstigers

I don't, but only for the reason that it is already used by geneticists for something else. I prefer the term "archived".



Haha, you win.

Archived it is.

We have a lot of 'archived' DNA.

And you are right about the specifics of the term recessive. Although admittedly I was using it in more of a general sense. But still. You win!

Nice one Roger



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash You win!
Nice one Roger


*smirk*

Well, wsn't trying to win, but thanks
It's just a pet theory of mine anyway. The DNA that our cells keeps immediately accessible is useful for day to day functions, but the stuff that is "zipped" up is for adaptation and "other" functions.

While I do sincerely believe that the whole of what we call "self" is more than the physical body (I am a body/mind/soul kind of person), that in no way discounts the really interesting and clever engineering of our physical selves.




top topics



 
5

log in

join