Consciousness Of The Germ Plasma

[boagie]

Hello All,

It is interesting, disturbingly so perhaps, that the consciousness of the germ-plasma has its own agenda, and you as an individual are not really that important. It has been found that the consciousness of the germ-plasma claims most of the excess energy of the body, for the maintenance of sexual preformance, very much less energy is aloted to repair and maintenance of the body. Scientest have speculated that if this system could be somehow tricked or reordered so that most of the energy went towards repair and maintenance, then we would all live longer more vital lives. A little distrubing to ponder that something else is running the show, that we are in fact manifestations/constructs of the will of the genotype. Any thoughts??

[urangutan]

Na sorry, here I can't interpret the question to suit my own reading so I best shut up this time. Hey, thanks for asking anyway.

[boagie]

Originally Posted by urangutan

Na sorry, here I can't interpret the question to suit my own reading so I best shut up this time. Hey, thanks for asking anyway.

urangutan,

Do you really need to post to say you having nothing to say?

At anyrate urangutan, welcome to the forum, glad to see you getting your feet wet. boagie

[urangutan]

It was a response that followed from the disease thread I commented on, where I wasn't sure I was responding correctly. I just felt that here I should confirm before I went off on a different tangent again. Sorry for missbehaving.

[VideCorSpoon]

I don’t know if germ plasm possesses any agenda, but perhaps the constituents do. The plasm is just the substrate… the liquid medium that primordia cultivate in. But it does seem sensible that germ plasm(a) claims most of the excess energy in the body. Excess energy in the body is wasted any way after metabolic diffusion, so if excess energy is lingering in plasm seems natural and of no consequence. But I am very wary about germ plasm and its own consciousness being relevant to the body post blastopore though… and we’re talking VERY FIRST blastopore… like initial fertilization first. As a side note, if germs possess any type of self-consciousness aside from engrained replication, we have put an end to the right to life debate. All in all though, I do not agree with the fact that scientist believe that if they can reroute this energy processing , people would be living longer lives. In fact, this is probably very bad for the body.

It is bad for the body because the body has a capacity and overdrive capacity for processes in the body. Say you are of average weight for your height and have a healthy intake, you are most likely to have bodily processes within the normal capacity of your body in cases such as cell replication for an example. Now if you are severely overweight, your body’s processes work twice as hard and cell replication capacity is increased beyond a safe threshold for bodily maintenance. If these scientists suppose that a longer life can be gained by working an engine twice as hard (more energy to process), I really disagree with that. Think about it… if you run your car engine twice as hard, it is more likely to break down twice as fast.

However, the main thing that help people live longer lives are fighting free radicals and carcinogens and such in your body. These things cause cancer and rapid aging. If you take 2000 mg of vitamin C a day, you are doing your body a great service because vitamin C is proven to fight most of these things.

But keep your eye out for a drug called resveritrol. This is the golden pill that is really supposed to extend your life by twenty to thirty years. Its made from grapes skin and fights inflammation and fungal propagation.

[boagie]

VideCorSpoon;

Your is a most impressive post, but, my referance was to a BBC lecture on the topic, if I can find it again, I shall list the link to it. If the energy in question is there maintaining the germ-plasma, why on earth would it be anymore damaging to be there in opposite proportions to do the maintenance work of the body fighting free radicals, carcinogens and doing repairs, we are not talking of an increase in energy but a realocation of said energy. It would seem that the genes are not so much interested in you as an individual but interested mainly in renewing the form. At anyrate I shall look for that lecture and post it if I can. It would seem god's design is just a tad faulty from an individual perspective, though obviously it is not the only perspective.


find here said lectures

BBC - Radio 4 - Reith Lectures 2001 - The End of Age

They are all interesting, however the lecture on, SEX AND DEATH, deals directly with the problem of the soma[body] and the germ-plasma--enjoy!

[VideCorSpoon]

Thanks for posting that article. I have to say that it’s a lot more interesting to read than applied genetics textbooks. I'll read over the rest of it more tonight.

Suffice to say that the body’s internal mechanisms and processes are preset and they are preset for a reason. Increasing the energy to a bodily process unfortunately does not work the same way in which we would switch a power setting. The more energy that is introduced to a preset system in the body, the more likely the area is going to “over heat” in mechanical terms and increase the chance of mutation. Disproportionate energy distribution also goes by the name platelet derived cell growth… commonly known as cancer. More energy than what is needed is very bad.

But I have to disagree with you though on one point. I think genes are interested in me as an individual. They may seem like they just perform self replication, but there are numerous checks and balances in the genetic replication process that ensure the replication of your specific code. That seems very preferential to me.

But as a side note, What I found interesting is that the foundation of life as we know it takes the shape and function of a giant zipper… just a thought.

[Aedes]

Boagie,
First of all, I'm honestly not exactly sure what you mean by germ plasma. I've really only run across that word used in reference to grains -- certainly never in the medical or medical scientific literature. But that's immaterial. If you're referring to the liquid, macromolecular, ionic, and energetic constituents of cells, then from a purely biological and biochemical point of view consciousness is a nonissue. Every biological system is to some degree energetically inefficient, but every biological system requires energy to function and to maintain itself. A self-regulating biological system that self-regulates by virtue of certain mechanisms is not conscious any more than your thermostat is conscious by turning on or off your AC based on room temperature.

Originally Posted by VideCorSpoon

If you take 2000 mg of vitamin C a day, you are doing your body a great service because vitamin C is proven to fight most of these things.

Aside from the fact that that is a potentially toxic dose, there is a massive meta-analysis by the Cochrane database that shows almost no benefit to vitamin C supplementation (in a well-nourished population without dietary deficiency) except a clinically meaningless shortening of URI duration (under 24 hours). And that is the best evidence there is -- nothing is more comprehensive or rigorous than the Cochrane database. But considering that vitamin C, being a supplement, is not regulated by the FDA, people make all kinds of hyperbolic statements about it that are completely unfounded. And for every weak 'beneficial' trial you show me about vitamin C, I can match you with non-beneficial trials of similar quality.

But keep your eye out for a drug called resveritrol. This is the golden pill that is really supposed to extend your life by twenty to thirty years. Its made from grapes skin and fights inflammation and fungal propagation.

We're all interested to see what comes of resveritrol, but hold your horses on the twenty to thirty year prediction. I can tell you that I will never prescribe it or even recommend it until we have good efficacy and safety data, and for the moment we have neither. The problem with overhyping drugs is we get into the scenarios we've had with Vioxx, with torcetrapib, with hormone replacement therapy, with SSRIs in children, etc. In other words, we miss the harm a drug can cause and can grossly overestimate its benefit until high quality data come in. And even if resveritrol can make lab rats live forever, it doesn't matter until large scale trials are done in humans.

[boagie]

Gentleman,

Seriously, some source of consciousness, from protoplasma, from germaplasma or the genes themselves, does seem to run deep, and that this said consciousness, has constructed this multi-cellular unit as organism for very functional reasons. Some of you seem to have some background in general systems theory, I admitt a general lacking in biology and general systems theory, but, if you are to contend that, there is not consciousness behind this contruction of a multicellular body and its maintenance you will have to invest some time here to explain how this comes about. That said, the division of labour so apparent between the soma[body] and that of the germplasma indicates again the presence of a consciousness, at a deeper more elemental level. If you wish to hear someone of science use this term germplasma in a scientific way simply read the following lecture on "Sex And Death", the link is provided below.



find here said lectures

BBC - Radio 4 - Reith Lectures 2001 - The End of Age

They are all interesting, however the lecture on, SEX AND DEATH, deals directly with the problem of the soma[body] and the germ-plasma--enjoy![/quote]

[Aedes]

Originally Posted by boagie

Some of you seem to have some background in general systems theory, I admitt a general lacking in biology and general systems theory, but, if you are to contend that, there is not consciousness behind this contruction of a multicellular body and its maintenance you will have to invest some time here to explain how this comes about.

In my own case I'm a physician and medical researcher, so I don't look at this from the perspective of systems theory -- and if systems theory regards consciousness as simply chemical / energetic responsiveness to external stimuli, then that is very much different than consciousness from a biological perspective.

From the point of view of plain old biology and medicine, consciousness is a function that is produced by an underlying mechanism, specifically the brain of an animal under conditions of wakefulness. A plant can be said to be aware of moisture in the soil and the direction of sunlight in the sky -- but this is not sensed or appreciated centrally -- so a plant cannot be said to be conscious. Our hair follicles tense up and produce goose bumps when we're cold -- this is an involuntary effect of our efferent central nervous system -- but that does not mean that our hair follicles are conscious of cold -- they're just responding to a biological mechanism. Our consciousness does not pertain to everything in our body -- only the things we're aware of.

How does consciousness come about? Well, digestion is produced by the physiologic functions of the stomach, ambulation is produced by the physiologic functions of the legs, hemofiltration is produced by the physiologic functions of the kidneys, and consciousness is one (of many) physiologic functions produced by the brain. And these physiologic functions inhere in the anatomy, physiology, histology, cell biology, and genetic and epigenetic processes of that organ (as well as all the other afferent neurological and endocrine/paracrine communication mechanisms that make it responsive to other parts of the body).