I'd love to believe that's true.
I'd love to believe that's true.
Maybe an excuse to batter down a few doors!!
Shill I post something now?!
http://precedings.nature.com/documents/4765/version/1
The human genome is composed of viral DNA: Viral homologues of the protein products cause Alzheimer's disease and others via autoimmune mechanisms.
Christopher J. Carter1
The human genome is composed of millions of fragmented contiguous viral DNA sequences, dating from the dawn of evolution and reflecting retroviral insertions over millions of years of coexistence. Herpes and other viral insertion points correspond to the locations of over 120 Alzheimer's disease susceptibility genes and to linkage hotspots. The greater the number of pathogen matches, the more important the gene. These DNA sequences are translated into short contiguous 5-12 amino acid stretches (vatches), identical in viruses and man, and in other pathogens implicated in Alzheimer's disease (Borrelia, Chlamydia, Helicobacter, C. Neoformans , P. Gingivalis). C. Neoformans, which has been associated with a rare but curable form of dementia, expresses the most number of hits to Alzheimer's disease proteins. Vatches are often immunogenic and antibodies to viral proteins may knock down their human counterparts or activate immune responses killing the cells containing their human homologues. This is supported by the presence of the complement membrane attack complex in Alzheimer's disease neurones and by the ability of tau antigens (homologous to pathogen proteins) to promote the formation of neurofibrillary tangles and Alzheimer's disease pathology in mice. Vatches may act as dummy ligands or decoy receptors and interfere with the interactome of their human counterparts. Alzheimer's disease is thus a "pathogenetic" disorder caused by pathogens but dependent on the genes that create these matching sequences. This scenario is relevant to many other, and perhaps most human disorders, given the massive genomic extent of viral coverage. The vatches in the human proteome, dictated by polymorphisms and mutations, may predict, from birth, the spectrum of pathogens that match our proteins and which pathogenetic disease we are likely to develop. These may all be preventable by vaccination, pathogen detection and elimination and curable by immunosuppressant approaches, perhaps with a unique, safe, and effective immunosuppressant panacea.
Good job we have Gavin, who explains everything in easy to understand language and never tries to baffle us with science!Originally Posted by gavin
But the article itself says the viral insertion took place over millenia. Not that it happened over the shortened period of GM. From my position of ignorance, is the DNA of virus' not relatively simple, and much simpler than of the DNA used in GM? Even if sometimes viral insertions were helpful, and sometimes indifferent, it does seem plausible that there's a decent risk of unintended consequences.
More importantly: it doesn't give me a warm glow that viral insertions into DNA are Good Things.... but this could be more about the article looking at altzeimers etc rather than longevity or Olympic-level athleticism than owt else!
The DNA of retroviruses has remarkable similarities to the casettes used to create a GM line. Genes with promoters, just a couple essential for the thing to work or maybe one, with flanking sequences to make the transfer work well.
Yes, the paper is about the mechanisms of Altzheimers and possibly a whole other range of conditions, and also the propsects of novel treatments and vaccines. Amazing stuff. But it lifts the lid on the fact that the genomes of humans, other animals and plants are not just littered with but in part built on genes from viruses and virus-derivatives. They replicate and hop around, then they mutate over time and lose their identity. The constants are the genes themselves and these are mostly maintained as they are by selection - over evolutionary time - essential to the survival of the organism. Duff ones are dead meat along with the individual carrying them. Unintended consequences are the norm. This is nature. Unintended worse ones are lost from the gene pool. Unintended changes that are neutral are allowed. Unintended better changes - for the time and circumstance - persist and thrive.
Does this mean that everyone should relax about GM? No, of course not! But a lot of the hysteria whipped up just seems alien to the working biologist. The act of inserting a gene of known type may have the effect intended from the understanding of the gene. It might also have unintended effects. Sometimes, depending on what the gene does and exactly where it sits. So test it first, that is all.
By "unintended consequences" I only really meant unintended by the scientist, am not sure that Mother Nature sits thinking through the impact of introducing virus' to genes....
GM crops aren't necessarily sterile (or are they?). Can even the most rigourous testing really show that the interaction between various differnt types of GM plants and the various non-GM plants can give us no problem? I'm far from convinced that the testing ever could be "enough".
How about this then. On subject as well!
Rosie
LOL! Pot-potatoes? We have the technology!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks