5 ms·

You know Lamarkism was discredited long ago? Anyway I do believe a good story could come from there.

infinite8s 16y ago
Epigenetics is the modern incarnation of Lamarkism. While epigenetics doesn't affect the underlying genetic code, some forms of it modify the expression patterns of genes (look up heritability of methylation patterns) which often have an environmentally determined component.
dmm 16y ago
Lamarkism might be seeing a revival. Not really! But something you might see as similar: epigenetics. Scientists are increasingly aware that gene expression is controlled by more than the genes themselves. Some of these control factors may be inheritable.
- tokenadult 16y ago
  [citation needed] It's important to be clear what people are talking about when they mention epigenetics. What examples did you have in mind?
  - rubashov 16y ago
    He gave you a citation. search on epigenetics. It's seen a lot of headlines in the last couple years.
    - tokenadult 16y ago
      Where do we see a specific citation in the thread below my question or nearby? A lot of different phenomena have been labeled "epigenetic" in the last few years, without great consistency. I have quite a large number of reference works on genetics at hand in my office, and I was asking specifically which study the HN participant to whom I was replying had in mind.
jacquesm 16y ago
That's just biology evolving your brain in such a way that you are hardwired to discredit Lamarkism lest you start interfering with the great plan.
lkozma 16y ago
But could this work with a non-Lamarkian explanation: say most people would smoke, some of them have a random mutation which makes them resistant to it, so they would be more likely to have children and care for them, so the trait would become more common in next generation. Isn't it just darwinian adaptation then?
- loewenskind 16y ago
  Except people rarely die before breeding age from smoking (ever?), so no effect.
  - anamax 16y ago
    > Except people rarely die before breeding age from smoking (ever?), so no effect. Grandparents provide some survival and family size benefits.
  - gnubardt 16y ago
    with the stigma placed on smoking in many societies smoking could in fact inhibit ones ability to breed (or at least influence it).
    - loewenskind 16y ago
      Except that the heaviest smokers are often found in the lower classes who also breed more than their rich and middle class comrades.
  - lkozma 16y ago
    I guess in older times even dying long after breeding could have had an effect: not being able to look after children => less chance of survival of children carrying same gene. You are right that in modern society this effect is not so powerful probably, but if we take this reasoning forward, it could mean that diseases of old age will be more and more prevalent as there is no selection pressure for defense against them. Is this happening already?

Epigenetics is the modern incarnation of Lamarkism. While epigenetics doesn't affect the underlying genetic code, some forms of it modify the expression patterns of genes (look up heritability of methylation patterns) which often have an environmentally determined component.

dmm 16y ago

Lamarkism might be seeing a revival. Not really! But something you might see as similar: epigenetics. Scientists are increasingly aware that gene expression is controlled by more than the genes themselves. Some of these control factors may be inheritable.

tokenadult 16y ago
[citation needed] It's important to be clear what people are talking about when they mention epigenetics. What examples did you have in mind?
- rubashov 16y ago
  He gave you a citation. search on epigenetics. It's seen a lot of headlines in the last couple years.
  - tokenadult 16y ago
    Where do we see a specific citation in the thread below my question or nearby? A lot of different phenomena have been labeled "epigenetic" in the last few years, without great consistency. I have quite a large number of reference works on genetics at hand in my office, and I was asking specifically which study the HN participant to whom I was replying had in mind.

jacquesm 16y ago

That's just biology evolving your brain in such a way that you are hardwired to discredit Lamarkism lest you start interfering with the great plan.

lkozma 16y ago

But could this work with a non-Lamarkian explanation: say most people would smoke, some of them have a random mutation which makes them resistant to it, so they would be more likely to have children and care for them, so the trait would become more common in next generation. Isn't it just darwinian adaptation then?

loewenskind 16y ago
Except people rarely die before breeding age from smoking (ever?), so no effect.
- anamax 16y ago
  > Except people rarely die before breeding age from smoking (ever?), so no effect. Grandparents provide some survival and family size benefits.
- gnubardt 16y ago
  with the stigma placed on smoking in many societies smoking could in fact inhibit ones ability to breed (or at least influence it).
  - loewenskind 16y ago
    Except that the heaviest smokers are often found in the lower classes who also breed more than their rich and middle class comrades.
- lkozma 16y ago
  I guess in older times even dying long after breeding could have had an effect: not being able to look after children => less chance of survival of children carrying same gene. You are right that in modern society this effect is not so powerful probably, but if we take this reasoning forward, it could mean that diseases of old age will be more and more prevalent as there is no selection pressure for defense against them. Is this happening already?