Week13

media type="youtube" key="wV1FrqwZyKw?fs=1" height="390" width="640"

I found this interesting abstract about identical twins with Huntington's Disease that probably would have fit well with our talk about the secret of life. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10091627

Are scientists starting to realize that not all of the secrets are necessarily in DNA, or do they always start with DNA when trying to find treatments for genetic diseases? What else is considered besides DNA?

=== I was wondering with all of the pitfalls we have studied in gene therapy, do you think this is just due to the limited understanding and ability we now posses, or will we never achieve what we had thought possible with gene therapy. Are we just not there yet scientifically or were we wishing for an ability that never really existed in our genes. http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v12/n5/full/nrg2971.html

My question deals with the excerpts outlining behavioral genetics. As stated in chapter 1, "Scientists realize that genes by themselves do not control behavior. Genes enable organisms to respond to and use what is around them in their environments. At the same time, environments influence the actions of genes" (Behavioral Genetics, 4).

So in theory, if two humans have the same genetic makeup, which would essentially be the case in identical twins, and all environmental factors are kept the same among the twins (same home, same school, same activities and experiences, etc.), wouldn't their behaviors be more or less exactly the same? In reality this is not usually the case. Twins often behave quite differently, despite having nearly identical genes and environments. So what accounts for this? Is it the difference between which genes are expressed in each twin? Or do even subtle variations in environment induce these noticeable changes among behavior?

Does any genetic discrimination occur with insurance companies against those who have tested positive for Huntington's Disease or any other genetic disorder. If so, is it legal to deny coverage because of this reason, or do insurance companies find some sort of loophole to do so? http://www.hdsa.org/living-with-huntingtons/family-care/living-at-risk/gina-information.html

We talked a little about how diseases still exist because they are in some way evolutionarily beneficial. For sickle cell, it is obvious that with malaria it can be beneficial, but Huntington’s, cystic fibrosis, among so many other diseases seem like there is no benefit. Especially for diseases causing children to die at birth or soon after birth. How do these diseases still exist if there is no apparent benefit?

My question is very short and simple this week. What do you think about those groups mentioned in the Rapp article who avoid possible difficulties in their future children's health by monitoring who they marry? Do you think this could be done in other cultures/societies? Do you think this could work to promote adoption (you, a person with hidden genetic problems, can marry this person who has the same issues if you don't have children and adopt instead)?

media type="youtube" key="36HquPzdxf4?fs=1" height="390" width="640" James Watson, intelligence, and Africa:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/fury-at-dna-pioneers-theory-africans-are-less-intelligent-than-westerners-394898.html

Heritability simulations: http://psych.colorado.edu/~carey/hgss/hgssapplets/heritability/heritability.intro.html