Muriel:
>>It is estimated that 1.5 million Americans have the double gene for HH,
>however, 98% of them do not know it.  Another 32 million Americans are
>"silent carriers" of the single gene which can be passed on to their
>children.  A new affordable DNA test is now commercially available which
>would help identify those people who carry the gene(s).  "Americans are
>dying of ignorance," Crawford says, "because we have the methods to
>completely control this disease and prevent the illnesses and premature
>death that it can cause."<<

Interesting. Any word about how old this HH is? I don't know if I'm ready
for a return of blood-letting though ;)

Did such a mutation occur in response to a diet deficient in iron (as we
might see at the onset of agriculture)? As paleodieters, it probably
behooves us to pay attention to any genetic change since the onset of
agriculture (or even cooking, but I'm almost embarrassed to mention raw
foods after the lunatic fruit and nut fringe spits up their creationist
crud ;)). Not to mention any research about lifespans and
diseases/parasites of our ancestors. <cough, cough>

>>The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has proclaimed HH the most common
genetic disease in the USA.  This common but little known disorder has
symptoms which can include heart disease, diabetes, arthritis, chronic
fatigue, impotence, infertility, and cirrhosis/cancer of the liver.<<

So there must be higher incidences in HHers, no? How significant is the
difference? I mean _everybody_ comes down with those symptoms these days,
no?

As much as I am rivited by genetic research, I remain wary. Don't they
supposedly have a gene for alchoholism? What's a fellow to make of that?
That there's a gene evolved to give us a disorder which wasn't even
possible until the regular production of fermented spirits?

I must be missing something. When germs were the cause of ill-health we had
antibiotics (which are about mined out according many folks); and now every
disorder from breast cancer to toenail fungus is due to genetics and we
have recombinant DNA and pricey screening techniques. I'm not saying that
genetics doesn't matter, not at all, but if a fellow has the gene(s) for
purple with yellow polka dotted warts, and they never express themselves
because of a proper paleolithic diet, then which causes Pw/YPD warts:
misnourishment or genetics? Or more germanely: if a fellow has the gene(s)
for HH and goes full force on a high-meat high-iron paleodiet, is his heart
attack due to misnourishment or genetics? ;) :)

Cheers,
Kirt

Kirt Nieft / Melisa Secola
[log in to unmask]