Energy-dependent purifying selection / autophagy (2)
Thanks to Teresa Binstock for alerting me to this example, which was reported as: Shared epigenetic changes underlie different types of autism.
Teresa wrote: “You might enjoy a glance at a use of epigenetic technology. Findings begin to answer, why such syndrome-defining traits given such diverse inter-individual genetics and numerous associations with environmental factors.”
She co-authored our 1996 Hormones and Behavior review: From Fertilization to Adult Sexual Behavior. She took responsibility for the accurate representations of what was known about molecular epigenetics at that time, and nothing has changed since then. For an example of what has been ignored in the context of differences in brain development, see:
See also: Single-Cell Gene Expression Analysis
My comment: Gene expression is energy-dependent. Virus-driven energy-theft prevents the gene expression that is required for cell type differentiation. Until theorists learn to place those facts into the context of RNA-mediated changes from physics to chemistry and the molecular epigenetics of cell type differentiation in all living genera the virus-driven threat to all humanity will be the biggest threat to have ever gone virtually unnoticed until it was probably too late to prevent the apocalypse.
For the past two decades, the government has focused its biodefense efforts on a list of known pathogens—such as anthrax, smallpox, and Ebola—declared by the Department of Health and Human Services and Department of Agriculture to have the “potential to pose a severe threat to public health and safety.” Government-funded research on these pathogens receives special scrutiny, and the National Institutes of Health limits researchers from conducting experiments that could make certain germs, like influenza, more dangerous.
It has been two decades since publication of From Fertilization to Adult Sexual Behavior.
Our section on molecular epigenetics attests to fact about energy-dependent RNA-mediated cell type differentiation, which is biophysically constrained by the physiology of reproduction in all living genera.
Greg Bear is the only person I know who, until later today, put our claims into the context of a popular representation of accurate claims about what serious scientists know for comparison to the claims of neo-Darwinian theorists and other pseudoscientists, including many creationists.
See: The Darwin Code
See also (from later today):
See for an example of pseudoscientific nonsense: “Gender Differences in Recognition of Toy Faces Suggest a Contribution of Experience” reported as Finally, a type of face that men recognize better than women:
My comment: The pseudoscientific nonsense of social scientists is alive and well despite the fact that every aspect of their neo-Darwinian theories has been refuted by experimental evidence of biologically-based cause and effect during the past twenty years.