I've just finished watching 'The Ghost in your Genes' - a topic on the Horizon program shown last week on SBS.
This documentary virtually confirmed something I had long believed and often been told to be bunk by "those who know" - or think they know.
What the show spoke about was an emerging science in genetic research called epigenetics, or, if I understand correctly, the study of genes retaining some memory of the previous generations from whence they came.
Previous scientific thought suggested that your genes were your genes and that their sequence was locked into place and no matter what you did in your life, the genes that you pass on to your children will be those that you were given upon your own conception.
So, instead of your offspring (unless you're like me where nature has decreed that you are never, never, never, ever, ever, ever going to be allowed to breed :) being given a clean genome sequence, they will actually get one from you that has been affected by your life experiences. If you've been through a traumatic experience; famine; good harvests; no stress, etc. etc., the differences will be reflected in your future generations.
Proof of this has been found in children and grandchildren of survivors of the Jewish Holocaust in the 1940's.
Before you say: "Ah, but that's just a Jewish thing to whinge and complain the way they do like on TV - there are no flow-through effects there!", think about this.... Studies have been done on women who were pregnant and present at the site of the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers in New York City. A child that had not been born yet cannot be affected by 'teachings' yet it shows that they were.
Surprisingly, it was only children who were in the third trimester at the time of the attacks who were affected.
Other tests were done on lab rats where they were exposed to a toxin that would flip a switch on one of their genetic elements. Not only did the switch get reflected in their offspring but this was carried through subsequent generations. Inference is given that non-exposed rats continued with their genetic structure unchanged.
I just know that this topic will have some serious detractors and supporters in the scientific world. Myself, I am a supporter. I have long believed that, as the offspring of a violent alcoholic, that I have the same weakness for addiction - this is why I knew from an early age that I should never, ever start drinking. Well, that and the fact that I am a totally cheap bastard and don't want to have to pay stupid amounts of money for a good time that I'll never remember anyway :)
Considering that I'm a shit-stirrer as well and have no problem walking into a pub out west and asking for a glass of milk just to see the look on the face of the publican and the people in the bar. Quite a few have said that either I can fight or I'm just nuts. I just say that I like milk :)
Now, considering that people have always been of the opinion that "my life is my life" and what I do to it won't affect anyone else, let alone their offspring - what genetic switches are being flipped in people here in Australia now that we are regarded as one of the highest users (per capita) of 'social' drug use - marijuana, ecstacy, ice, etc? Don't forget alcohol in that mix either.
What genetic switches have been 'flipped' in those around us who've abused their bodies in the belief that they will just pass on a 'clean' genome sequence?
Kinda scary, eh?
8 comments:
Indications that a tendency toward alcoholism runs in families are well documented. The question was whether the behavior in the subsequesnt generations was learned from the original alcoholics or if it was genetic in nature. There are specific metabolic differences among ethnic groups that affect the rate at which alcohol is processed, too, decidedly geneticly based.
That said, I think it is a mistake to underestimate the effects of learned behavior. Whether we are aware of it or not, we establish the environment for a child with everything we say and do. To blame "genetic switches" might let the child, once he is grown, off the hook for making his own choices. You choose to be sober. The adult who chooses to drink to excess has to take responsibility for that choice, regardless of the alcoholism of his parents, don't you think?
We have enough idiots in society who think that because they weren't breast-fed as a baby or someone say "No" to them when they wanted to kill their brother when they were 5 years old, that they are now not responsible for their own actions.
I don't drink because I choose to not drink. I also don't run over kids on skateboards on the road because I choose not to do it (considering that the governing factor is that it will cause panel damage on the car :)
I can remember making life-relevant decisions when I was 7 & 8 years old and I carry them through to this day.
People need to rediscover that they *ARE* responsible for their own actions and that going: ".../this/ happened to me as a kid!" will yield the repsonse of "BOO HOO - who friggin' cares!" from me.
I have to agree with Rhonda's points.
Another example: let's say you have a family of obese people, Mum, Dad, and the kids, all quite large. What will all of them likely tell you, if asked? "Genetics, nothing we can do, all pre-ordained". However, what do all of the family members have in common apart from genetics? Ah, that's right, same diet same eating habits, same proportion sizes, same exercise / activity patterns (or not). "Genetics" is almost never (and I do mean never) the "cause" of obesity - which is caused by the boring old rule of energy in / energy out.
But, back to your post: yes, I have read about this every now and then, and it's definitely a concern, for everyone.
Really interested to know: in the show, with the testing of babies born after 9/11 - what were the tests, and what did the tests "show"?? Not at all obvious! :-)
Actually, there is a 'syndrome' according to the program where the person has an appetite that they just cannot control - these are often the people you see who are like 300 & 400+ kg.
The main point of the post was to say to keep a look out for the show the next time it comes on to SBS.... I forgot to mention that... :)
The tests on the 9/11 mums & tots was some test that is done via to tongue to check the levels of a hormone in the body that is raised significantly when someone has PTSD or high stress. It rated highly in just the mums of 1st & 2nd trimester babies but not in the children but in both for the 3rd trimester bubs (at the time of the 9/11 attacks).
I think I will have to do more of a search to find out more about this. I think I put a link to Wikipedia in the post. Worth checking out.
Jai - the syndrome of which you speak, or "thyroid problems", perhaps (that used to be a good stand-by, remember?) - yes, perhaps that does exist, but would be true, and perhaps provable some day, for the very smallest percentage of the population - like less than one per cent.
My comments & example really were about the majority of people who do not have any medical condition, or genetic fault - no matter how much they wish they could use that excuse.
Didn't you see the list of top ten excuses for being fat, which I posted only a little while ago? :-D (Yes, there is such a list, put together by qualified people!)
Caz,
What I *don't* know about medicine would fill a library, so for the number of people with thyroid problems, I couldn't even begin to speculate - but I would suspect that the number would be quite low.
I agree whole-heartedly with what you say though about the majority of people - most seem to look for a medical reason to explain their inability to practice self-discipline. If the blame can't be put onto another person or the government then it must be a medical issue - or, for those who are dedicated hypocondriacs not afraid to go the extra yards for their bit of attention: mental issues.
I probably did see the top 10 list of yours but I've slept since then and have promptly forgotten about it :)
I would guess that it would be like the instructions on a shampoo bottle:
Eat too much - exercise too little - repeat.
Nuh - it was far better than that Jai.
http://avatarbriefs.blogspot.com/2006/07/top-ten-excuses.html
I think, also, we must be vigilant about the escalating "medicalisation" of pretty much everything.
This is a confluence between advances in science, the power and greed of drug companies, political control of the populace, and broader social controls and sanctions over what is and isn't *acceptable* - many of these functions, long, long ago, were performed by the church.
The church offered heaven or hell, and strict and punative moral boundaries.
Medical science and the practice of medicne now does pretty much the same (life / death; good /bad; normal / abnormal), but with an even greater scope and with a legitimacy and a more potent moral punch than anything that religion ever had at its disposal. It's something of a paradox, given that churches are not thrilled with this secular trend.
Post a Comment