Alzheimer’s disease could be caused by herpes virus, warn experts


Professor Douglas Kell of the University of Manchester’s School of Chemistry, said “We are saying there is incontrovertible evidence that Alzheimer’s Disease has a dormant microbial component. We can’t keep ignoring all of the evidence.”

My comment: What evidence? Microbes and Alzheimer’s Disease is still listed as an in-press publication. Perhaps they are telling others to stop ignoring all my evidence.

See for example: Energy dependent RNA-mediated immunity (2)


If you only look at the works cited in this poster session, you could link everything known about nutrient-dependent cell type differentiation to healthy longevity. You could also link everything known about viruses to all pathology. For example, the nematode model of learning and memory links amino acid sensing to RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions that protect our organized genomes from virus-driven changes in nerve cells that alter olfactory acuity and specificity in Alzheimer’s disease.

For comparison, Greg Bear made the connection from viruses to all pathology in a series of science fiction novels that began with “Blood Music” in 1985. It took evidence of the transgenerational epigenetic inheritance of Zika virus pathology to prompt serious scientists to expose the pseudoscientific nonsense that has been touted by neo-Darwinian theorists during the past 30 years of scientific progress. All scientific progress has continued to support obvious links from atoms to ecosystems, which are perturbed by virus-driven energy theft.

Ecological adaptations are nutrient-dependent and cannot be placed into the context of theories about beneficial mutations and evolution, which is pseudoscientific fiction.

Gene intelligence

Last month, one of the top intelligence officials in the United States warned that genome-editing technology is now a potential weapon of mass destruction. Techniques such as the emerging CRISPR–Cas9 system, US director of national intelligence James Clapper warned in an annual threat-assessment report to the US Senate, should be listed as dangers alongside nuclear tests in North Korea or clandestine chemical weapons in Syria (see

Jon Stewart interviews Greg Bear. They discuss Quantico.  So does the US director of national intelligence James Clapper. See “Statement for the Record Worldwide Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community Senate Armed Services Committee”


Genome Editing
Research in genome editing conducted by countries with different regulatory or ethical standards than those of Western countries probably increases the risk of the creation of potentially harmful biological agents or products. Given the broad distribution, low cost, and accelerated pace of development of this dual-use technology, its deliberate or unintentional misuse might lead to far-reaching economic and national security implications. Advances in genome editing in 2015 have compelled groups of high-profile US and European biologists to question unregulated editing of the human germline (cells that are relevant for reproduction), which might create inheritable genetic changes. Nevertheless, researchers will probably continue to encounter challenges to achieve the desired outcome of their genome modifications, in part because of the technical limitations that are inherent in available genome editing systems.

See also: Ecology: Biology distilled


Carroll has made a strikingly clear case that ecology is a science on a par with molecular biology and genetics. In many ways, this book is a homage to Charles Elton, who helped to define ecology as the study of species interactions in a ‘trophic’ network shaped by the environment (see E. Marris Nature 459, 327–328; 2009). Building on his vision, Carroll provides a passionate motto for the twenty-first century: “better living through ecology”.

My comment: I placed his passionate motto and six rules of regulation (his “Serengeti Rules”) into the context of this invited review of nutritional epigenetics.

Nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled ecological adaptations: from atoms to ecosystems

The rules of regulation are Kohl’s “Laws of Biology.”


Kohl’s Laws of Biology… are so-named because the surname of the first author or sole author on each of 7 peer-reviewed publications in the paragraph below is Kohl. The Kohls did not create the Laws of Biology; they merely independently incorporated what is known about them into what appears to be a cohesive series of published works.

Kohl’s Laws of Biology

Life is nutrient-dependent. That is a Biological Law. The ecological origin of all biological laws is apparent 1) in the context of systems biology (P. Kohl, et al., 2010); 2) in the context of the metabolism of nutrients by microbes (K. D. Kohl, 2012); and 3) in the context of how the metabolism of nutrients results in species-specific pheromones that control the physiology of reproduction (J. Kohl, Ostrovsky, Frechter, & Jefferis, 2013). Taken together, the systems biology of nutrient metabolism to species-specific pheromones, which control the physiology of reproduction, can be expressed in a summary of Kohl’s Laws of Biology: 1) Life is nutrient-dependent. See for review (J. V. Kohl, 2012; M. Lynch, 2007). The physiology of reproduction is pheromone-controlled. See for review (J. V. Kohl, 2013). In the context of nutrient-dependent epigenetically-effected human reproduction, it is clearer that the epigenetic effects of human pheromones integrate neuroendocrinology and behavior (J. V. Kohl, et al., 2001), which includes the neuroendocrinology of mammalian behavior associated with the development of sexual preferences (J.V. Kohl, 2007).

Kohl’s Laws help to explain what was missing from Darwin’s ‘conditions of life.’

See also: Gone is the solitary genius – science today is a group effort


Seeking general patterns and processes responsible for these patterns has long been the holy grail of ecology. Collaboration makes this quest achievable.

My comments: Group efforts have focused on making claims that are consistent with neo-Darwinian pseudoscience. The groups hope their efforts will continue to be funded by unsuspecting government agencies.

Recently, private parties with billions to spend have contributed prize money to academics in groups. Many people seem to think the groups will accomplish something faster that has always been accomplished by individuals.

One passionate individual who is not stopped by “group think” or ridiculous theories can disseminate more accurate information than any group. Monographs can help individuals jump at least two decades ahead of those who should be peers, but can’t be. Co-authors can always be helpful, but ultimately someone like me must work alone, albeit with the support of others like Teresa Binstock, who also works alone.

Academics in groups are constrained by other academics, which makes progress painfully slow and ridiculously expensive. The best example of this slow progress is found in the obvious links from ecological variation to ecological adaptation that many ecologists are still trying to put into the context of neo-Darwinian nonsense.

See: The spotted gar genome illuminates vertebrate evolution and facilitates human-teleost comparisons


Because of gar’s phylogenetic position, slow rate of sequence evolution, dense genetic map and ease of laboratory culture, this resource provides a unique bridge between tetrapods and teleost biomedical models. Our analyses show that gar bridges teleosts to tetrapods in genome arrangement, allowing the identification of orthologous genes by possessing ancient VGD ohnologs lost reciprocally in teleosts and tetrapods and elucidating the evolution of vertebrate-specific features, including adaptive immunity and mineralized tissues, and the evolution of gene expression.

My comment: This group of 61 authors seems to not know anything about the nutrient-dependent RNA-mediated innate immune system links the ecological landscape to the physical landscape of supercoiled DNA in the organized genomes of all living genera.  They make a claim about the evolution of gene expression, when all serious scientists know how to link the de novo creation of nucleic acids to the nutrient-dependent de novo creation of genes. All serious scientists also know that virus-perturbed protein folding chemistry leads to gene loss or to the creation of pseudogenes. Anyone who still claims that vertebrate-specific features “evolved” has missed all the experimental evidence from physics and chemistry that links the conserved molecular mechanisms of biologically-based cause and effect from hydrogen-atom transfer in DNA base pairs to all biomass and all biodiversity.

The missing evidence shows up in this report of the group’s work. Finding our genomic inner fish with the spotted gar


We were interested in regulatory elements known as enhancers, which are genetic switches that turn certain genes on or off. In particular, we were looking for enhancers that regulate genes involved in limb development. Without them, limb formation can’t occur.

My comment: Similarly, formation of the bacterial flagellum cannot occur outside the context of the nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled physiology of reproduction that links hydrogen-atom transfer in DNA base pairs to RNA-mediated cell type differentiation in the context of supercoiled DNA that protects all organized genome from virus-driven entropy. The flagellum formed over-the-weekend.


For other example of what is known about biolgoically-based cause and effect, see the works of Anna Di Cosmo’s group; Eugene Daev’s group, and Bruce McEwen’s group.



Keep Reading