<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Thursday, November 17, 2005

The food you eat may change your genes for life (New Scientist Magazine) 

Check out this link: http://www.newscientist.com/channel/health/mg18825264.800
 
From issue 2526 of New Scientist magazine, 17 November 2005, page 12
 

The food you eat may change your genes for life

  • 17 November 2005
  • NewScientist.com news service
  • Alison Motluk

IT SOUNDS like science fiction: simply swallowing a pill, or eating a specific food supplement, could permanently change your behaviour for the better, or reverse diseases such as schizophrenia, Huntington's or cancer.

Yet such treatments are looking increasingly plausible. In the latest development, normal rats have been made to behave differently just by injecting them with a specific amino acid. The change to their behaviour was permanent. The amino acid altered the way the rat's genes were expressed, raising the idea that drugs or dietary supplements might permanently halt the genetic effects that predispose people to mental or physical illness.

It is not yet clear whether such interventions could work in humans. But there is good reason to believe they could, as evidence mounts that a range of simple nutrients might have such effects.

Two years ago, researchers led by Randy Jirtle of Duke University Medical Center in Durham, North Carolina, showed that the activity of a mouse's genes can be influenced by food supplements eaten by its mother just prior to, or during, very early pregnancy ( New Scientist, 9 August 2003, p 14). Then last year, Moshe Szyf, Michael Meaney and colleagues at McGill University in Montreal, Canada, showed that mothers could influence the way a rat's genes are expressed after it has been born. If a rat is not licked, groomed and nursed enough by its mother, chemical tags known as methyl groups are added to the DNA of a particular gene.

The affected gene codes for the glucocorticoid receptor gene, expressed in the hippocampus of the brain. The gene helps mediate the animal's response to stress, and in poorly raised rats, the methylation damped down the gene's activity. Such pups produced higher levels of stress hormones and were less confident exploring new environments. The effect lasted for life ( Nature Neuroscience, vol 7, p 847).

Now the team has shown that a food supplement can have the same effect on well-reared rats at 90 days old - well into adulthood. The researchers injected L-methionine, a common amino acid and food supplement, into the brains of well-reared rats. The amino acid methylated the glucocorticoid gene, and the animals' behaviour changed. "They were almost exactly like the poorly raised group," says Szyf, who announced his findings at a small meeting on environmental epigenomics earlier this month in Durham, North Carolina.

Though the experiment impaired well-adjusted animals, the opposite should be possible, and Szyf has already shown that a chemical called TSA that is designed to strip away methyl groups can turn a badly raised rat into a more normal one.

No one is envisaging injecting supplements into people's brains, but Szyf says his study shows how important subtle nutrients and supplements can be. "Food has a dramatic effect," he says. "But it can go both ways," he cautions. Methionine, for instance, the supplement he used to make healthy rats stressed, is widely available in capsule form online or in health-food stores - and the molecules are small enough to get into the brain via the bloodstream.

Rob Waterland from Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas, who attended the meeting, says Szyf's ideas are creating a buzz, as they suggest that methylation can influence our DNA well into adulthood. A huge number of diseases are caused by changes to how our DNA is expressed, and this opens up new ways of thinking about how to prevent and treat them, he says.

But Waterland points out there is still much work to be done. Substances like methionine and TSA are, he says, a "sledgehammer approach", in that they are likely to demethylate lots of genes, and we don't even know which they will affect. But he speculates that techniques such as "RNA-directed DNA methylation", so far tested only in plants but theoretically possible in mammals, may allow us to target such methylation much more precisely.

 
______________________
 
Hazem Azmy
http://hazemazmy.8m.net/home.html
http://hazemazmy.8m.net/cyberbabel.html
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aitheatre/
______________________
 
All the world is not, of course, a stage, but the crucial ways in which it isn't are not easy to specify
 - Erving Goffman

Saturday, November 05, 2005

www.AskPhilosophers.org: A Site that puts the talents and knowledge of philosophers at the service of the general public 


Check out this link: http://www.thes.co.uk/current_edition/story.aspx?story_id=2025828
 

Log on to discuss why we are here

Anthea Lipsett

The Times Higher Education Supplement
Published: 04 November 2005


Have you ever wanted to know what wasn't art, or the difference between ethics and morality, or if, assuming there is no afterlife, it's irrational to fear death? Now members of the public with a desire to have such profound questions answered can turn to a website launched last month by professional philosophers.

The idea behind AskPhilosophers.org, hosted by Amherst College in the US, is to put the skills and knowledge of philosophers at the service of the public.

Already signed up are Simon Blackburn and Peter Lipton, both of Cambridge University; Roger Crisp, fellow and tutor in philosophy at St Anne's College, Oxford University; and Gabriel Segal, head of the philosophy department at King's College London.

Professor Lipton, head of Cambridge University's department of history and philosophy of science, said the project created a "philosophers' commune".

"It's very important that philosophers get out more. It's a profession, and we have highly technical literature - but we are asking questions that lots of people are interested in," he said. "I find it refreshing to answer questions that are non-academic."

The tricky part was writing clearly enough for a general audience while not boring the other philosophers on the panel, Professor Lipton said. "It's a challenge, but it really is fun. I'm addicted."

The site was set up last month by Alexander George, chairman of Amherst's philosophy faculty. So far, the 36 panellists have answered 380 questions.

Of more than 1,100 questions submitted since the site's launch, some 360 were posted, and they drew almost 500 responses. Questions run the gamut of existential angst: why are people sometimes mean; why is stupidity not painful; and is happiness possible?

anthea.lipsett@thes.co.uk

Art, life and death: sample of postings on AskPhilosophers.org

Q: Assuming there is no afterlife, is it irrational to fear death?

A: It's irrational to fear what death will feel like if you know it won't feel like anything; but it doesn't follow that it is irrational to fear death. It's not irrational to look forward to the pleasures of living, and if we know that death will take these away, the fear of losing those pleasures doesn't seem irrational either.

Peter Lipton, head of department of history and philosophy of science, Cambridge University

Q: Are there arguments against gay marriage that are not religious, bigoted or both?

A: There are no good arguments meeting that description.

Gabriel Segal

Q: What is not art?

A: Lots of things: the orange in front of me, the bus outside my window, George Bush, the number four, Palo Duro Canyon and so on.

What makes something not art calls for a definition of art. Once we knew what the definition was, we could determine what did not fall into the category. I suspect this is not the best way to go.

Aaron Meskin, lecturer in philosophy, Leeds University

Q: What is the difference between ethics and morality?

A: A distinction is sometimes drawn between ethics as concerning all the values or goods that might be instantiated in a person's life (wellbeing, friendship, virtue of character, aesthetic qualities and so on), and morality as the narrower domain of moral obligation only (right and wrong, what is forbidden and permitted and so on).

Roger Crisp, Uehiro fellow and tutor in philosophy at St Anne's College, Oxford University

Q: Should education be a means to an end?

A: I do not see anything wrong with using education as a means to an end, such as when I suffer through a dreary course on car mechanics so that I can learn how to fix my own engine.

Having said this, I don't think education is always merely a means to an end.

Not only can it be fulfilling to learn certain things even if this knowledge is put to no practical use, but the very process of educating oneself can be fulfilling independently of any value practical or otherwise in the things learnt.

Joseph G. Moore



______________________
 
Hazem Azmy
http://hazemazmy.8m.net/home.html
http://hazemazmy.8m.net/cyberbabel.html
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aitheatre/
______________________
 
All the world is not, of course, a stage, but the crucial ways in which it isn't are not easy to specify
 - Erving Goffman

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?