'Bad' Protein Linked to Numerous Health Problems

nbahi15 writes "A report in the July 13th edition of the online Journal of Clinical Investigation has linked the aP2 protein to asthma and several other diseases. It also suggests a connection between the metabolic and immune systems and these diseases." From a related Forbes article: "To study the effects of aP2, the researchers created genetically engineered mice that could not produce the protein. 'They're metabolic supermice,' Hotamisligil said. 'We cannot make them obese, diabetic or atherosclerotic. They don't develop fatty liver disease, and they don't develop asthma.' In mice with an animal model of asthma, the researchers found that aP2 regulated the infiltration of inflammatory molecules into the lungs."

Comments

My Question

[MyLongNickName]

If these proteins are so bad, and so easy to genetically engineer out, then from an evolutionary standpoint, why do we have these genes? Are we sure this protein doesn't have a big positive effect that we are not aware of?

Re:My Question

[Anonymous Coward]

Are we sure this protein doesn't have a big positive effect that we are not aware of?

Yes. This is the gene that prevents you from turning into a super mouse. For everyone except mice, that's a major positive effect.

Re:My Question

[Mprx]

The protein is associated with diseases that mostly happen in later life, so there will be very little evolutionary pressure to remove it. Evolution optimizes for reproductive fitness only, and as elderly mice do not look after their young, genes that improve survival in old age will not be selected. It would require only a minor benefit in youth to evolve a gene which causes harm in old age.

Re:My Question

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, that particular conjecture in the study is piss poor if you look at it closely. The conjecture is based on a survey conducted on members of Mensa. Mensa is nowhere near a good representative cross-section of smart people. It boggles the mind, really, how the authors made the leap from the fact that Mensa has a higher percentage of asthmatics and myopes than the average to a correlation between asthma and myopia and intelligence. That is grossly inaccurate.

The only conclusion that you can draw from their study, with respect to this particular topic (which, incidentally, is just a small sidenote in the study), is that there is a correlation between asthma and myopia and Mensa. That's a no-brainer, really. Mensa is self-selected for people whose primary interests are purely intellectual. Myopes and asthmatics are physically predisposed towards activies like those conducted by Mensa. Duh. They seem to have forgotten that there are many people, such as myself, who've posted scores that would allow them into Mensa, but decline to join because their interests lie in areas other than brainteasers and discussions.

You cannot draw statistically valid conclusions about an entire population by studying a self-selected subset of that population.

Re:My Question

[Maxo-Texas]

Something not considered in most of these studies is:

Is RED meat bad for you or..

Is RED meat raised on pesticide polluted corn instead of grass, shot full with hormones and drugs bad for you.

Is CHICKEN bad for you...

Is CHICKEN raised in pens with thousands of others in a highly stressful, low exercise, drug/hormone/pesticide polluted environment bad for you.

I personally think that a lot of the benefits of vegetables, beef, and chicken are not present in factory raised conditions. You have a tomato that *looks* like a tomatoe but which is 80% fiber (so it ships well) and lacks the nutrients. Chicken and beef are good because they eat tons of bugs and plants and concentrate the nutrients and minerals in those plants and we adapted to eating those kinds of animal meats. We have not yet adapted to eating meat that looks like meat but which has different nutritional value than it used to.