4 ms·

Surely this must be true given all the weird junk in our DNA and specialized traits like the genes that cause sickle cell, but resist malaria. https://www.cdc.

Surely this must be true given all the weird junk in our DNA and specialized traits like the genes that cause sickle cell, but resist malaria. https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/about/biology/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/about/biology/index.html

Nasrudith 8y ago
That is true but sickle cell isn't the best example for that. It is essentially a 'useful glitch' of a trait as opposed to something viral. There are ancient viruses embedded in human DNA. Effectively the embedding is just another form of mutation to the genome (although there are distinct patterns). It gets embedded regardless if it is copying errors, mutagenic chemicals, or electromagnetic radiation in cause. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/04/science/ancient-viruses-dna-genome.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/04/science/ancient-viruses-d... Theoretically it /is/ possible for the right sequence of say radiation damage and auto-repair to give rise to segments of a virus in DNA but the odds are stupidly lower. To use an example technically you could scatter scrabble tiles randomly to get quotes from Shakespeare if you do it enough but you are far more likely to occasionally get gibberish than "WHAT LIGHT THROUGH YONDER WINDOW BREAKS" - let alone in the right order.
- FakeComments 8y ago
  I’m not sure I follow what you’re saying. Nobody claimed sickle cell had anything to do with viruses; I claimed that sickle cell is a mutation which provides a protection to malaria — which it does. From the person I was replying to: > We might find that every N years a new disease emerges, spreads, and then is adapted to - and we're just lucky enough to be around to observe this current wave Sickle cell seems like precisely that in response to malaria, in human history. In addition to sickle cell as a trait which shows that adaptation, our DNA is full of evidence of wide spread viruses, eg wide spread infection, because of the patterns in junk DNA. It’s not just mutation — it’s also a chemical signature of the rate of retrovirus epidemics. Your post seems not to have understood mine, talking about nonsense with radiation — which is nonsense because I never mentioned a means of adaptation, but merely signatures of historic disease spread (and a case of adaptation).

Nasrudith 8y ago

That is true but sickle cell isn't the best example for that. It is essentially a 'useful glitch' of a trait as opposed to something viral. There are ancient viruses embedded in human DNA. Effectively the embedding is just another form of mutation to the genome (although there are distinct patterns). It gets embedded regardless if it is copying errors, mutagenic chemicals, or electromagnetic radiation in cause. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/04/science/ancient-viruses-dna-genome.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/04/science/ancient-viruses-d... Theoretically it /is/ possible for the right sequence of say radiation damage and auto-repair to give rise to segments of a virus in DNA but the odds are stupidly lower. To use an example technically you could scatter scrabble tiles randomly to get quotes from Shakespeare if you do it enough but you are far more likely to occasionally get gibberish than "WHAT LIGHT THROUGH YONDER WINDOW BREAKS" - let alone in the right order.

FakeComments 8y ago
I’m not sure I follow what you’re saying. Nobody claimed sickle cell had anything to do with viruses; I claimed that sickle cell is a mutation which provides a protection to malaria — which it does. From the person I was replying to: > We might find that every N years a new disease emerges, spreads, and then is adapted to - and we're just lucky enough to be around to observe this current wave Sickle cell seems like precisely that in response to malaria, in human history. In addition to sickle cell as a trait which shows that adaptation, our DNA is full of evidence of wide spread viruses, eg wide spread infection, because of the patterns in junk DNA. It’s not just mutation — it’s also a chemical signature of the rate of retrovirus epidemics. Your post seems not to have understood mine, talking about nonsense with radiation — which is nonsense because I never mentioned a means of adaptation, but merely signatures of historic disease spread (and a case of adaptation).