Re: [xmca] epigenesis

Thanks Martin,
   
  Paul

Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu> wrote:
  Emily, Catherine, Paul,
The inheritance pattern that was highlighted in the documentary was the
impact of famine (surely a trauma) on fatal illnesses in subsequent
generations. Male and female ancestors made different, sometimes opposite,
contributions. The inherited alterations are not to the genes themselves,
but to the binding of molecules which influence gene expression. (Also,
animal research shows that maternal child-rearing behavior can influence
children's gene expression.) I agree, Paul, the implications are
mind-boggling.

More info here:

Martin

On 10/27/07 3:01 PM, "Paul Dillon"
wrote:

> Martin,
>
> The implications of this are mind-boggling. I'm especially thinking about
> the consequences of such "traumas" as enslavement and conquest or even the
> trauma of such political violence as Rwanda or what happened here between
> 1980-95 a period during which all the centuries old settlement patterns were
> totally transformed, entire communities abandoned, and more than 70,000 deaths
> (a level of violence which seems to have entirely escaped the attention of all
> but a few) ..
>
> One methodological question: parish birth records don't contain DNA samples
> of the parents. So I'd imagine there is some type of back-tracking deduction
> to establish genetic lines. Is there any way to identify the genetic
> contributions of the male and female lines? Can any genetic inheritance be
> tracked clearly to one line at the three-generations (eight lines) distance on
> the basis of the samples taken in the currrent generation? How do they
> connect a trauma or other factor in one line to the genetic alterations? Is
> it at the allele level?
>
> Beside the PBS documentary, do you have any other references to this study?
>
> Paul
>
> Martin Packer
wrote:
> Paul,
>
> The PBS documentary includes discussion of a retrospective analysis of data
> over at least 3 generations in a relatively isolated Scandanavian community:
> in particular, records of births and deaths (with cause of death) and annual
> harvest yields. The focus of the documentary was not merely on the
> epigenetic pathways of individual development (e.g. that genetically
> identical twins diverge in their patterns of gene expression over the
> years), which is a notion that's been around for a while, but on mechanisms
> of *inheritance* of epigenetic pathways. So post-traumatic stress in one
> generation may well be *inherited* by children and even grand-children. To
> my knowledge this is a new idea, and one for which the mechanisms are now
> being worked out (methylation of the DNA, I think).
>
> Martin
>
>
> On 10/26/07 1:49 PM, "Paul Dillon"
> wrote:
>
>> I'm looking forward to learning mmore about the research in that field by
>> definition it would seem to require a study that tracked three or more
>> generations of families at both that genetic and socio-cultural levels which
>> is 90 years for humans populations. That's long after I'll be following
>> all of this. :)
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> Bruce Robinson
> wrote:
>>
>> Paul Dillon wrote:
>>> Jay,
>>>
>>> Any possible answer your question " . . . why is the model of
>>> gene-determinism so appealing, almost a religion today, both among molecular
>>> biologists and the lay public? Why has it been so easy for the media to
>>> spread this gospel?"
>> I was pleasantly surprised to hear human genome mapper (and would be
>> privatiser) Craig Venter dissociate himself from crude genetic
>> determinism in an interview he gave to the BBC Today programme. He came
>> out against the one to one 'a gene for...' idea, talked about the social
>> environment of development interacting with genetic tendencies and being
>> more important in a whole range of behaviour, as well as, in a comment
>> on the Watson controversy, describing race as a social construct with no
>> scientific basis. So there clearly are exceptions. But I do accept that
>> genetic determinism is pervasive and think Jay is right to point to the
>> resulting fatalism about social inequality as a cause, perhaps less as
>> an excuse for people to do nothing and more as a justification of why
>> things are the way they are in the first place. This is not new - Marx
>> pointed to Darwin's drawing on Malthus and his picture of nature
>> reflecting the model of competitive capitalism.
>>
>> Bruce R
>>> would seem to require an adequate theory of why any "knowledge
>>> system/ideology" is dominant in a given society at a given time. From the
>>> perspective of the classic Marxist model, i.e., "dominance of the ideas of
>>> the dominant economic forces" , the dominance of the genetic metaphor in
>>> contemporary capitalist societies seems to provide a text book case. The
>>> primary client for the products of the bio-technology and pharmaceutical
>>> industries in which most geneticists is the health care industry (15% of US
>>> GDP) , then there's the GMO dominance in capitalist agriculture. Along with
>>> cybenetics , genetic technologies , suffuse the fabric of modern economic
>>> activity.
>>>
>>> But that's only a formal cause and although probably a necessary condition
>>> for the ideological dominance of some branch of knowledge, still
>>> insufficient
>>> to answer your question. I think one of the effective causes at the
>>> psychological level , might have to do with the utopian futures genetics
>>> provides the "cult of eternal youth" , likewsie a root metaphor of popular
>>> consumer culture. The promised developments of genetic technologies
>>> certainly
>>> have that Utopian dimension, better futures quality that makes of good
>>> ideology.
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> Do You Yahoo!?
>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>> http://mail.yahoo.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Received on Sat Oct 27 15:24 PDT 2007