Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Age and Down Syndrome?
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 31 of 76 (714032)
12-19-2013 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by PlanManStan
12-19-2013 11:29 AM


When a gene is mutated, I don't see anything wrong with saying the gene has been damaged.
You do?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by PlanManStan, posted 12-19-2013 11:29 AM PlanManStan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by ringo, posted 12-19-2013 12:15 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 33 by PlanManStan, posted 12-19-2013 12:17 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 76 (714040)
12-19-2013 12:25 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by ringo
12-19-2013 12:15 PM


So you've got some DNA, doing its self replicating thing... there's a string of genes coming through and then, whoops, a mistake is made and it isn't copied properly. Seems to me that saying that gene was "damaged" isn't that big of a deal, but I'll grant you that its a bit sloppy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by ringo, posted 12-19-2013 12:15 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by PlanManStan, posted 12-19-2013 12:28 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 38 by ringo, posted 12-19-2013 12:31 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 76 (714041)
12-19-2013 12:27 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by PlanManStan
12-19-2013 12:17 PM


Oh, I dunno, they do refer to the process of mutation as copying errors. Genes are the way they are until something goes wrong and then they become different. I suppose "damage" can have some unnecessary implications, but I don't think its that far off.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by PlanManStan, posted 12-19-2013 12:17 PM PlanManStan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by PlanManStan, posted 12-19-2013 12:29 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 76 (714047)
12-19-2013 12:43 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by ringo
12-19-2013 12:31 PM


The thing is that some of those copying errors produce improvements in the organism. It's only the ongoing history of the species that tells us whether an "error" was "damage" or not.
But you could still call it damage to the gene.
If you damage the roof my car, but then it ends up going faster, I don't think there should be a problem with saying the roof was damaged.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by ringo, posted 12-19-2013 12:31 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by ringo, posted 12-20-2013 12:00 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 40 of 76 (714048)
12-19-2013 12:47 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by PlanManStan
12-19-2013 12:29 PM


Oh yes it is! Look up the definition of damaged. What you described was change.
Argument via Dictionary is the worst. Damage is a type of change.
According to google:
quote:
Damage
verb
1.
inflict physical harm on (something) so as to impair its value, usefulness, or normal function.
bold added
When a gene's normal function is altered because of a physical change, it can be said that it has been damaged.
It isn't the biggest deal, but to be clear, the "errors" that they commonly refer to are the errors in copying the DNA perfectly, not errors as in damaging the product.
Yeah, and I'm saying the gene was damaged, not the organism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by PlanManStan, posted 12-19-2013 12:29 PM PlanManStan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by PlanManStan, posted 12-19-2013 12:53 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 44 of 76 (714055)
12-19-2013 2:13 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by PlanManStan
12-19-2013 12:53 PM


That Google definition is worthless,
You're the one who told me to look it up!
because it says "inflict physical harm on [something] so as to impair its value, usefulness, or normal function". "Normal" is subjective,
Normal is what the gene did before it was mutated.
and genetic mutations are not physical "harm", because again, harm is subjective.
Yeah, but the gene is still being changed physically. Its not what it was before. I still don't have a problem calling that "damage".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by PlanManStan, posted 12-19-2013 12:53 PM PlanManStan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by PlanManStan, posted 12-19-2013 3:37 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 46 of 76 (714086)
12-19-2013 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by PlanManStan
12-19-2013 3:37 PM


"Look it up" isn't synonymous with "Google it".
It is in my world.
And is it?
Use the quote function already, is what what?
Is "normal" defined as what the gene did before the mutation? Isn't that gene, then, abnormal based on what it is a mutation of?
Sure, but as a gene gets fixated there shouldn't be a problem with calling it normal. Although, normalcy is kind of a fluffy concept anyways.
It isn't what it was before, but is that necessarily "damage"?
Not necessarily, but the word "damage" can work. I can see unnecessary implications and that the usage is sloppy, but I don't think its totally unwarranted.
I understand where you are coming from and don't doubt your knowledge, I'm just saying that damage is a poor word to use, because it implies certain things, like tampering. The way "damage" is usually used, it implies someone tampered with something and caused it harm.
I don't see that implication at all. The sun damages our skin, for instance.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by PlanManStan, posted 12-19-2013 3:37 PM PlanManStan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by PlanManStan, posted 12-19-2013 4:57 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 50 of 76 (714096)
12-19-2013 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by PlanManStan
12-19-2013 4:57 PM


I have no idea how to use the quote function. No one has told me. Remember, this is my 6th day on this site.
If you type into the text box: [qs]shaded quotes are easy[/qs], then it will become:
shaded quotes are easy
If you type into the text box: [quote]regular quotes are also easy[/quote] then it will become:
quote:
regular quotes are also easy
I prefer shaded quotes ("qs" means "Quote Shaded") for when quoting from the message you're replying to and regular quotes for when you are quoting from outside of that message.
After you hit "Reply" next to the text box you'll see this:
dBCodes On (help)
That help link will take you to a page outlining the kinds of coding you can do.
Also, at the bottom right corner of every message is a "Peek" button. That will show you exactly what the person entered into the text box. So if you see something awesome that you want to do, take a Peek.
What do you mean by "when a gene gets fixated"?
wiki on fixation
I see your point, and there's nothing to argue about, because we are agreeing here that damage is a sloppy term
Fair enough. On the other hand, its a completely accurate term used by molecular biologists:
quote:
The process by which normal cells become progressively transformed to malignancy is now known to require the sequential acquisition of mutations which arise as a consequence of damage to the genome. This damage can be the result of endogenous processes such as errors in replication of DNA, the intrinsic chemical instability of certain DNA bases or from attack by free radicals generated during metabolism. DNA damage can also result from interactions with exogenous agents such as ionizing radiation, UV radiation and chemical carcinogens. Cells have evolved means to repair such damage, but for various reasons errors occur and permanent changes in the genome, mutations, are introduced.source
bold added for emphasis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by PlanManStan, posted 12-19-2013 4:57 PM PlanManStan has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024