Comments on: Creative bacterial destruction http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/07/creative-bacterial-destruction/ Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:55:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Brad http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/07/creative-bacterial-destruction/#comment-43888 Brad Fri, 13 Jul 2012 04:18:44 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=17266#comment-43888 " If you add copies of a gene the result is not always good because of dosage effects (Down Syndrome is an extreme case of this on the smallest chromosome)." As a father of a child with Down syndrome, I would take exception to this comment. First DS, is not "bad" - my daughter is an amazing and wonderful person, and her DS is part of that wonderful person. SHe is one of the most amazingly positive things that has ever happened in my life. SO I have a hard time reconsiling that with your "extremely bad" synopsis. Second, DS is not an at all extreme case - it is rather run of the mill. It is so minor of a variant that it is survivable and very common place (1 in 733 births). People with DS lead full, productive and meaningful lives. That is not extreme, it is mild. Extreme would be being born inside out or having no chance of surviving 72 hours. Please don't add to the misconceptions around Down syndrome. Most of us parents, siblings, and self-advocates find this to be both untrue and unhelpful. ” If you add copies of a gene the result is not always good because of dosage effects (Down Syndrome is an extreme case of this on the smallest chromosome).”

As a father of a child with Down syndrome, I would take exception to this comment. First DS, is not “bad” – my daughter is an amazing and wonderful person, and her DS is part of that wonderful person. SHe is one of the most amazingly positive things that has ever happened in my life. SO I have a hard time reconsiling that with your “extremely bad” synopsis.

Second, DS is not an at all extreme case – it is rather run of the mill. It is so minor of a variant that it is survivable and very common place (1 in 733 births). People with DS lead full, productive and meaningful lives. That is not extreme, it is mild. Extreme would be being born inside out or having no chance of surviving 72 hours.

Please don’t add to the misconceptions around Down syndrome. Most of us parents, siblings, and self-advocates find this to be both untrue and unhelpful.

]]> By: Mike Keesey http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/07/creative-bacterial-destruction/#comment-43887 Mike Keesey Wed, 11 Jul 2012 16:45:59 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=17266#comment-43887 Perhaps this could give insight into why the ancestors of birds underwent a reduction in genome size long *before* they developed flight: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v446/n7132/abs/nature05621.html (Previously it had been supposed that volancy provided a selective pressure to reduce genome size.) Perhaps this could give insight into why the ancestors of birds underwent a reduction in genome size long *before* they developed flight: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v446/n7132/abs/nature05621.html

(Previously it had been supposed that volancy provided a selective pressure to reduce genome size.)

]]> By: JR http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/07/creative-bacterial-destruction/#comment-43886 JR Wed, 11 Jul 2012 14:12:45 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=17266#comment-43886 One particular question I stumbled upon in Bio 101 that hightened my interest in genetics was how a human gene regulates the number of ribs a person will have. If this gene is accidentally deleted in recombination (or through some other process) a person will have an additional set of ribs. I was told that human predecessor species provided the genetic information for the extra set of ribs, but humans evolved a gene to prevent the growth of those ribs. I found this fascinating because it seemed counter to the efficiency one at the Bio 101 level would expect from genetics. It's amusing to me that these the genes of these species behave in differently counter-intuitive way. One particular question I stumbled upon in Bio 101 that hightened my interest in genetics was how a human gene regulates the number of ribs a person will have. If this gene is accidentally deleted in recombination (or through some other process) a person will have an additional set of ribs. I was told that human predecessor species provided the genetic information for the extra set of ribs, but humans evolved a gene to prevent the growth of those ribs. I found this fascinating because it seemed counter to the efficiency one at the Bio 101 level would expect from genetics.

It’s amusing to me that these the genes of these species behave in differently counter-intuitive way.

]]>