Here's a bit of info you all might find interesting:

This is from the UC Berkley alumni mag.

Richard Strohman, retired from faculty, says that the project to sequence the
human genome is a huge fiasco, and will not lead to the eradication of all
diseases. Only 30,000 genes were found, when 100,000 were expected, and only
300 distinguish us from a mouse. He says that the entire premise is flawed,
and quotes Craig Venter, president of Celera, as saying "this tells me that
genes can't possibly explain all of what makes us what we are." Strohman
himself goes further and says that Venter's remark means that this is
"nothing less than the failure of genetic determination - the biological
theory that complex characteristics of human beings are caused by specific
genes"

He also quotes Stephen Jay Gould as saying that "the collapse of the doctrine
of one gene for one protein, and one direction of causal flow from basic
codes to elaborate totality [whatever that means!], marks the failure of
genetic reductionism for the complex system we call biology."

Basically he says that most human diseases are "multifactorial: They are
influenced by many genes interacting with one another and by a vast array of
signals within the cellular environment (including nutrient supply, hormones,
and electrical signals from other cells) and all these in turn are influenced
by the external world of the organism as a whole."

He says there is a better theory, known as dynamic-epigenetic, which states
that many genes code for many proteins over time, hence "dynamic," and
"epigenetic" because it is "above genetics in level of organization."

He believes we are in the middle of a "biological revolution." Genetic
determinism is a failure, and the alternative theory of dynamic-epigenetics
is incomplete.  But he believes it will be very difficult to change course,
because of "corporate forces that have huge economic investments at stake.
This resistance grows stronger as a result of university alliances with the
world of corporate biotechnology."

He says that "it must be emphasized that we simply do not understand how
living cells respond over time to their manipulation through genetic
engineering, and thus the error factor remains large."

He is pretty concerned about this. He says that "first we need ... scientific
standards that would constrain attempts to genetically engineer or clone
ourselves, our children, other animals, and the plants that constitute the
basis of our agriculture..."

"as many developmental scientists have said, we are still in the dark ages
about how organisms regulate their genomes to produce adults. While the
scientific inquiry must go on, technological applications must stop..."

"premature disease and death will surely come if we allow continued
degradation of the very environment so necessary for the healthy expression
of genes now present in all of us"

Pretty strong stuff. So no more genetic engineering. Is anybody listening...?


Charles
San Diego, CA