Guest guest Posted May 29, 2007 Report Share Posted May 29, 2007 Okay, so what would you rather treat, your genes or your infection? If I can treat my genes, I'd like to be 2 inches taller please. I'm not against genetic research. It's got a great future. but I'm concerned about right now, Pwcs are spending far too much time thinking about their own genes and not nearly enough time about the organisms' genetic capabilities. penny <usenethod@...> wrote: > I understand the impulse, Penny, but I think it can do just as much > damage to your cause to come off all buy-eyed (pun intended) for one > facet of chronic illness, and one solution to it. I don't see a > conflict between flogging the virulence and tenacity of pathogens and > the need for aggressive treatment, while also acknowledging that > tenacity could be caused or exacerbated by disregulated immune systems, > deranged protein synthesis, environmental toxins, impaired detox > pathways and yes, even genetic vulnerability in some form.That's accurate. Classical infectious disease is more genetic than Iever reckoned, as I found out by reading "Suceptibility to infectiousdiseases" or whatever it's called. One of the authors even suggested that the classical infectiousdiseases were significantly more inheritable than the "autoimmune"diseases. It's certainly possible to make such a case by looking at(genetically-)identical twins.One of the papers found that the difference between disease and benigninfection with schistosomes was largely explained (~50% or something)by a SINGLE GENETIC LOCUS (possibly comprising a few related genes,but inherited as a unit)! I was surprised it could be so simple and bold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 29, 2007 Report Share Posted May 29, 2007 Penny You are made up of more bacterial cells than human cells. tony > > > I understand the impulse, Penny, but I think it can do just as much > > damage to your cause to come off all buy-eyed (pun intended) for one > > facet of chronic illness, and one solution to it. I don't see a > > conflict between flogging the virulence and tenacity of pathogens and > > the need for aggressive treatment, while also acknowledging that > > tenacity could be caused or exacerbated by disregulated immune systems, > > deranged protein synthesis, environmental toxins, impaired detox > > pathways and yes, even genetic vulnerability in some form. > > That's accurate. Classical infectious disease is more genetic than I > ever reckoned, as I found out by reading " Suceptibility to infectious > diseases " or whatever it's called. > > One of the authors even suggested that the classical infectious > diseases were significantly more inheritable than the " autoimmune " > diseases. It's certainly possible to make such a case by looking at > (genetically-)identical twins. > > One of the papers found that the difference between disease and benign > infection with schistosomes was largely explained (~50% or something) > by a SINGLE GENETIC LOCUS (possibly comprising a few related genes, > but inherited as a unit)! I was surprised it could be so simple and bold. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.