Go Back   Matt-Hughes.com Official Forums > General Discussions > The Woodshed

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #141  
Old 11-25-2009, 04:14 AM
J.B.'s Avatar
J.B. J.B. is offline
WAR CARDINALS!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Apache Juntion, AZ
Posts: 8,462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shon8121 View Post
Disease?
LOL....

yeah, the one that infects message boards looking for an argument...

clearly, we need a stronger anti-biotic....
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 11-25-2009, 04:17 AM
shon8121
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J.B. View Post
LOL....

yeah, the one that infects message boards looking for an argument...

clearly, we need a stronger anti-biotic....
Fine. I'll leave on my own.
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 11-25-2009, 04:17 AM
J.B.'s Avatar
J.B. J.B. is offline
WAR CARDINALS!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Apache Juntion, AZ
Posts: 8,462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shon8121 View Post
Fine. I'll leave on my own.
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 11-25-2009, 10:44 AM
Neezar's Avatar
Neezar Neezar is offline
SupaDupaMod
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South
Posts: 6,484
Send a message via Yahoo to Neezar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shon8121 View Post
!!!
Haha. If you say so boss.

But uh, lets remember what a Theory is as defined by Science (not coloqially, like the word "gay" has been altered over time with misuse): An explanation for a collection of facts. And yes that website directs you to "peer reviewed sources" just like you requested. So quit moving the goalpost please. Thats a logical fallacy.

If a Theory is so bad... why don't you stop using Gravity then?

Theory: A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena.

So, not really an explanation for a collection of facts. I think it would be more acturate to say it is:

A possible explanation for something not yet understood.

Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 11-25-2009, 11:18 AM
Neezar's Avatar
Neezar Neezar is offline
SupaDupaMod
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South
Posts: 6,484
Send a message via Yahoo to Neezar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mscomc View Post
Umm, I don't think this is your fault, as the word mutation in the media has gotten the rap of of ALWAYS being bad, and thats not true. I think we always equate it with: ionzing radiation thats gonna de-form us and our babies will be born without noses and stuff. But there are some benfical mutations.

1) Many people in northern europe have a mutated version of the CCR5 receptor on their cell surface. The CCR5 receptor is what the HIV virus uses to infect cells. The people in europe, have ones that are deformed. As such, they are completely immune to HIV. You can expose them to it as much as you want, and they wont get it. At the same time, there hasnt really been any observable difference with their rest of their metabolism


2) people with really fast metabolisms throughout life have had some mutations in a protein called the UCP3, called Un-coupling proteins. People who have a faulty funcitoning UCP3 (from a mutation) have been shown to metabolize fats and carbs very well, as such: diabetes is almost elimnated, high cholesterol, athersclerosis is reduced etc etc etc

3) It is beleived that a transposable elements may have inserted itself in the place that coded for Cellulose metabolism. Therefore, now we cant use Cellulose as a source of Carbs, BUT.....in place, we can now use Fiber in the G.I tract to help us push out feces...... This is may be why the appendix and cecum have NO physiological function anymore. At the same time, the fecal bulk that gets formed in G.I tract can help stimulate immunity. So having good stools, is good all the way around

----those are a few examples, there a more. You have to know though, having a good mutation come along is SLOOWWWWWWW. Just like in X-MEN Proffessor Xavier said its a slow process, but every few hundred millenia (or was it million?) something happens!!!!
I think this whole post is misleading as examples of benefical mutations. I shall come back to it later though when I have more time.

But one question will be 'many' people have this mutation of the receptor. Last I heard there was 5, 5 people. And not 5 people right now, only 5 people EVER known to have it. Unless..... you got something new on that?
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 11-26-2009, 02:59 AM
mscomc
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neezar View Post
I think this whole post is misleading as examples of benefical mutations. I shall come back to it later though when I have more time.

But one question will be 'many' people have this mutation of the receptor. Last I heard there was 5, 5 people. And not 5 people right now, only 5 people EVER known to have it. Unless..... you got something new on that?

Galvani AP, M Slatkin. Evaluating plague and smallpox as historical selective pressures for the CCR5-delta 32 HIV-resistance allele. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100(25):15276-15279.

Galvani AP, J Novembre. The evolutionary history of the CCR5-Delta32 HIV-resistance mutation. Microbes Infect. 2005;7(2):302-9.

Sabeti PC, E Walsh, SF Schaffner, P Varilly, B Fry, HB Hutcheson, M Cullen, TS Mikkelsen, J Roy, N Patterson, R Cooper, D Reich, D Altshuler, S O'Brien, ES Lander. PLoS Biol. 2005;3(11):e378.



----------------- These are just some of the research papers that i have read. They beleive that about 10% of All (not just northern, my bad) europeans have this chemokine delta 32 deletion. True, there is debate over where exactly this mutation came from, and why it ISNT found in africa, or india, or other 3rd world nations where HIV is high.

here is even a study from the US department of health and human services...

http://www.nih.gov/news/pr/jan2006/niaid-17.htm

----in this study alone, they estimate that "1% of north american whites, have this receptor mutation"...........Where did you hear 5 from?
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 11-26-2009, 03:02 AM
shon8121
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neezar View Post
Theory: A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena.

So, not really an explanation for a collection of facts. I think it would be more acturate to say it is:

A possible explanation for something not yet understood.

The dictionary dot com definition may seem a little different than the actual Scientific definition is just like the word "gay" has been altered over time thanks to coloqial misuse. But what I said about the word "Theory" stands.

Quote:
I think this whole post is misleading as examples of benefical mutations. I shall come back to it later though when I have more time.

But one question will be 'many' people have this mutation of the receptor. Last I heard there was 5, 5 people. And not 5 people right now, only 5 people EVER known to have it. Unless..... you got something new on that?
Um... I'm not at all trying to make it appear that there are no negative mutations or something. The majority of mutations are neutral... but negative mutations are sort of "weeded out" by Natural Selection as they show up.
But what are you talking about when you mention a mutation of a receptor? Can you be more specific?
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 11-26-2009, 03:04 AM
mscomc
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shon8121 View Post
The dictionary dot com definition may seem a little different than the actual Scientific definition is just like the word "gay" has been altered over time thanks to coloqial misuse. But what I said about the word "Theory" stands.



Um... I'm not at all trying to make it appear that there are no negative mutations or something. The majority of mutations are neutral... but negative mutations are sort of "weeded out" by Natural Selection as they show up.
But what are you talking about when you mention a mutation of a receptor? Can you be more specific?
Technically the receptor has deletions in it...its lacks certain Amino acids that used to be in it. As such, HIV cant bind to the cell (via the receptor).
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 11-26-2009, 03:05 AM
shon8121
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mscomc View Post
Technically the receptor has deletions in it...its lacks certain Amino acids that used to be in it. As such, HIV cant bind to the cell (via the receptor).
Uh... the receptor that you mentioned?
I just wasn't sure what he meant exactly. There are many receptors... haha, so I wanted to be sure what I was debating against.

*EDIT*

Forgive me, but I somehow seemed to skim over the post you made about HIV and the peeps in Europe that have seemed to have a sort of "immunity" to it. My mistake. I was too excited and ambitious to answer comments and I missed your point. :-(
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 11-26-2009, 03:12 AM
mscomc
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

meh, i forgive you....but JUST THIS ONCE!!!!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.