RE: We are NOT our DNA

From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Tue Oct 08 2002 - 18:32:12 MDT


On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, gts wrote:

> The text I use for reference is _Endocrine
> Physiology_ by Balint Kacsoh, a textbook for med students. Trust me,
> Robert, the endocrine system is *extremely* complex. :)

Oh, I believe you. When Chris Heward and I get to chat he explains
to me how its at the stage where he doesn't think he can keep track
of it all anymore -- and he's a specialist in the area. [I'm a bit
more optimistic since I think will push on the computer pseudo-AI
side of things sufficiently to wrestle it into a form our minds can
manage.

>
> > I would say that "some" of that information is contained in our genes.
>
> Okay, then where is the rest of it?

Its "state" information. All of the cells, not just the neurons contain
some history of where they've been, what they've encountered, etc.
I'd consider most of it to be primarily locked up in the proteins,
but if you think about membrane fluidity (which impacts hormone
signal times) then you could include the lipids as well. [Membrane
fluidity is going to depend in part on your diet over weeks or
months.]

> Every neuron in our brains contain our DNA. Every action of a given
> neuron is under the control of the genetic material in the nucleus of
> that neuron, such that every thought is under the control of our genes.

I don't think this is an accurate picture -- the DNA is a blueprint for
most or all of the structures in the neuron. But the primary "actions"
of the neuron (whether or not to fire) is "controlled" by the surrounding
neurons.

[snip discussion of how testosterone works]

> The entire process is under genetic control.

I understand how the nuclear hormone receptor systems work and agree that
they regulate gene expression which in turn has downstream effects. *But*
there are many other systems that don't need to go anywhere near the nucleus
to have an effect. See for example the transpath database:

http://193.175.244.148/

While most things eventually get to the nucleus some of them do so by
quite indirect routes. The induction of apoptosis for example acts
primarily on the mitochondria -- nuclear effects are probably entirely
secondary (needing to digest the chromatin so it can be easily mopped
up by surrounding cells).

But I think we've gotten into a long debate that gets away from some
of the initial points. I believe those were that we have chemical
agents acting at very subtle levels to influence our behavior (such
that one might begin to question how much "free will" one really
does indeed have). Those agents are our selfish genes at work and
one of the tasks facing transhumanists will be to slowly develop
controls over those agents without messing up the entire system.

Robert



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:28 MST