Genetic breakthrough that reveals the differences between humans

[MGD]

By Steve Connor, Science Editor
Published: 23 November 2006

24 November 2006 08:12
The discovery has astonished scientists studying the human genome - the genetic recipe of man. Until now it was believed the variation between people was due largely to differences in the sequences of the individual " letters" of the genome.

It now appears much of the variation is explained instead by people having multiple copies of some key genes that make up the human genome.

Until now it was assumed that the human genome, or "book of life", is largely the same for everyone, save for a few spelling differences in some of the words. Instead, the findings suggest that the book contains entire sentences, paragraphs or even whole pages that are repeated any number of times.

The findings mean that instead of humanity being 99.9 per cent identical, as previously believed, we are at least 10 times more different between one another than once thought - which could explain why some people are prone to serious diseases.

The studies published today have found that instead of having just two copies of each gene - one from each parent - people can carry many copies, but just how many can vary between one person and the next.]

Read more at:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/science_technology/article2007490.ece

[MGD]

1. It makes sense and seems to be so obvious as to be easily overlooked.

The implications for gene therapy are encouraging. Many experimental failures in the past may have to be reassessed in the light of this improved understanding. If a patient failed to demonstrate improvement after the insertion of a single gene, perhaps they would show improvement if 100 copies of the gene were inserted.
typo

[w4rma]

2. Organic programming code. Maybe computer programmers and language translators should study this.

I think the repeating code is the equivalent of repeated procedure calls.

[MGD]

3. I know of one individual who has actually

John Koza. He linked together several hundred computers and programmed them to use a kind of natural selection for the purpose of coming up with original inventions. It was actually called an invention machine and it works quite well.
Here's the popular science article:
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/printerfriendly/thenewexplorers/0e13af26862ba010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html

[w4rma]

4. Yes. He's looking at the systems from a macro level, however.

However, imho, genetic code should also be looked at from the micro level.

Like looking at genetic code as one would look at the assembly language of a solid state computer...

No, maybe assembly language is too high level a programming language for this analogy? Instead, the *machine* language of a solid state computer is probably more appropriate to this analogy.

[BrklynLiberal]

6. Fascinating concept.

[Uben]

5. The reverse could actually be the answer

Instead of adding multiple genes to correct a disorder, the presence of multiple identical genes may actually be the cause. Never overlook the obvious. Since we do not have the ability to remove genes, an addition of offsetting genes might actually act as a genetic cure. Same theory, different twist.

[maddezmom]

7. duplicate topic

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2627640