6 ms·
It's too bad that the cost to sequence a human genome was above $100 million dollars in 1997. Of course, by the time Jeanne Calment was 122 years old her genome
by pazimzadeh 10y ago
It's too bad that the cost to sequence a human genome was above $100 million dollars in 1997. Of course, by the time Jeanne Calment was 122 years old her genome would have accumulated thousands of mutations, so what we would have needed is to sequence her in 1875, the year that she was born (someone correct me if I'm wrong).
Now that the price of sequencing the human genome is ~$1000, is it worthwhile to sequence all newborns, so that on the off chance that a person is a long lived anomaly we can study what made them so?
- mabbo 10y agoIt could be that those mutations were what kept her alive so long.
- Hermel 10y agoNot every cell changes the same way. So if you have a large enough set of DNA samples from distinct cells, you could probably reconstruct the original.
- pazimzadeh 10y agoGood point. I thought have thought of that - otherwise how are we able to reconstruct the genetic makeup of Neanderthals or any other extinct species?
- sp332 10y agoI don't think most cells would have accumulated mutations. Sequencing DNA from several samples should still give a pretty clear result.
- Practicality 10y agoThis is pretty much what our sex cells are. It's part of why newborns are so healthy, genetically. And they only use two cells.
- hyperbovine 10y agoThe genetic basis of longevity is highly debatable. But anyways, just sequence her kids. Not that it matters so much, since even if we had that information we wouldn't know what to do with it. Longevity is a highly polygenic trait, and as it stands we barely understand the genetic architecture of even much simpler ones like height.
- darawk 10y agoNo it isn't. Lobsters have no known biological senescence. The difference between a lobster and a person is genetics.
- goatlover 10y agoDoes that difference preclude senescence in humans being polygenic?
- brianwawok 10y agoThe difference between a person and a lobster, is a lobster is delicious.
- overcast 10y agoSo you know with absolute certainty that a human isn't?
- yellowapple 10y agoBut so are humans, so I'm failing to see your point.
- hx87 10y agoAssuming humans taste somewhat like pigs, humans are every bit as delicious as lobsters.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> The difference between a lobster and a person is genetics. A difference. There are others.
- mhurron 10y agoTo start sequencing everyone's genome as they're born seems a little Gattaca. We might as well fingerprint everyone and submit them to a national database while we're at it.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- tempestn 10y agoSeems pretty likely to me that if we stick around long enough we will definitely sequence everyone's DNA as a matter of course. What we'll want is to have a decent ethical and legal framework around that by the time it happens.
- givinguflac 10y agoIn the US it is actually quite common (if not consistent) that newborns have blood samples taken for screening. I would be surprised if those samples are destroyed after, so we are certainly well on our way.
- Retric 10y agoThe oldest person, and the person whose DNA maximizes lifespan are very likely to be different. Further, DNA sequencing is only part of the issue. The state her cells where in over time is also critical information. PS: Basically, an identical clone of her would have very low odds of living to 122. Though likely better odds of hitting 100 than the average person.
- jsprogrammer 10y agoCouldn't samples have been taken and stored to be sequenced later, when it was cheaper?