Slashdot Mirror
What You Eat Affects Your Genes
purkinje writes "Tiny bits of genetic material, called microRNAs, can make their way from the food you eat into your blood stream, and change how your genes are expressed, according to a new study. A team of Chinese scientists found tiny bits of white rice microRNA floating around in people's blood after a meal. When they looked at what was happening on a cellular level, they found that the microRNAs were changing gene expression, decreasing levels of a receptor that filters out LDL (bad) cholesterol. When the scientists gave mice both rice and a chemical to block the microRNAs, their levels of that receptor returned to normal — showing that the microRNAs weren't just swimming through the blood stream, but acting on genes in the animals' cells."
... Jeans
I eat lot of junk food, so only my junk dna is affected. And my sweatpants don't fit anymore. But that's ok; my virtual girlfriend still says I look good.
This is amazing and one more nail in the coffin of our long-held dogma of genes being passed down from two parents, expressed but otherwise unaltered, then passed down to our children, all with just a little bit of mixing and mutation. From epigenetic modifications, to massive variances of stomach flora even between relatives, now to food's ability to affect our very gene expression... we've got some serious reconsidering to do about what makes us who we are.
Very cool.
Hey mate, spare a sig?
Food is essentially a chemical. DNA is a chemical. Should we be surprised that one chemical would have an effect on other chemicals?
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
This is why we have the phrase 'You are what you eat," after all.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
In ten years we could have scientifically proven "homeopathic" remedies.
Gene-doping through diet manipulation. Lose weight, increase brain function, increase blood flow while reducing blood pressure, even creating or discovering new gene functions. Perhaps a mutation that gives blood plasma a lubricating effect that prevents arterial plaque.
Or, for the vain men (and women) in the audience, truly reversing hair loss.
"Helping to keep you two steps ahead of the Thought Police!"
Just a side note, a common preservative Sodium(Natrium) Benzoate (NaC6H5CO2) used in most foodstuff is long known to cause alterations in human DNA. For example, almost all brands of ketchups use this preservative.
Wikipedia: Sodium Benzoate: Safety & Health
Diet Coke to drop additive in DNA damage fear
How long do these changes last?
If this were a permanent change, one would wonder why all those Southeast Asian people who consume white rice regularly don't end up with high LDL counts counts and subsequently a high per-capita rate of heart attacks.
Is this a short-lived change, like until the affected cells undergo Mitosis again (~30 mins.), or is there another food in tyhese people's diets that counteracts this genetic change?
Who are "they" and what did "they" study and how did "they" study it? Not to be crude, but links or gtfo. Seriously, nobody cares what you think "they" said or did unless you can prove it.
GMO means a lot of different things to different people. It could mean chemically modified DNA sequences or clever breeding techniques or even simply hybridizing plants using low tech means.
Language exists to express ideas. If you don't provide clarity and context, you're wasting everyone's time.
Can't tell if trolling or just very ignorant. I could have modded, but I'd rather educate. First off, treating all GMOs as if they have the same traits is just stupid. There are bunches of different genes that have been inserted and potentially any gene could be used, so acting as if one trait should matter for every other one is beyond senseless. Second, the traits you're talking about were not designed for that purpose (although that was a side effect the companies no doubt considered), but rather was to prevent the flow of the genes to other people's crops (the very thing people are trying to sue Monsanto over now...they're evil bastards if they do, and evil bastards if they don't. Third, those traits are not in use anyway. Because most seed sold nowadays is hybrid seed (hybrid and GMO are different and commonly confused but not mutually exclusive things) farmers typically want to buy new seed anyway, as they have been doing long before GMOs came on the scene. Before you complain about something, might want to do some basic fact checking first. Fourth, I highly doubt the study you mention was done all that well in light of the hundreds showing no harm from GM food and the fact that the best causative mechanism for why GMO food would be inherently dangerous is...oh wait, no one has ever proposed any coherent way that could happen. Fifth, this new paper (assuming it is accurate) says nothing about GMO safety. There are thousands of genes for all sorts of stuff in every single thing you eat. I highly doubt transgenes are going to behave differently, especially considering that the only three traits currently in use (the Bt gene, an EPSP synthase gene, and viral coat protein genes) can very easily be found in non-GM food too. So basically, no, this has no relevance on genetic engineering whatsoever, but I have no doubt someone out there will cite it as such.
Yes, because up until recently we thought that cell membranes kept all the environmental chemicals out except only the ones that are allowed in. Every year we're learning that cell membranes are much more permeable than we thought and that chemicals we used to think never entered cells are in fact binding to stuff inside cell nuclei (even more membranes to go through) and affecting genes directly. We used to think that anything that happened in the nucleus was strictly controlled by a cells own internal messaging mechanisms. Now we're not sure. Much more environmental interaction is allowed than what was previously believed.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
A Fat Man's Prayer:
Lord, my soul is ripped with riot,
Incited by my wicked diet.
"We are what we eat!" said a wise old man;
And Lord, if that's true, I'm a garbage can.
I want to rise on Judgment Day, that's plain;
But at my present weight, I'll need a crane.
So grant me strength, that I may not fall,
Into the clutches of cholesterol.
May my flesh with carrot-curls be sated,
That my soul may be poly-unsaturated.
And show me the light, that I may bear witness,
To the President's Council on Physical Fitness.
And at oleomargarine I'll never mutter,
For the road to Hell is spread with butter.
And cream is cursed; and cake is awful;
And Satan is hiding in every waffle.
Mephistopheles lurks in provolone;
The Devil is in each slice of baloney;
Beelzebub is a chocolate drop;
And Lucifer is a lollipop.
Give me this day my daily slice,
But cut it thin and toast it twice.
I beg upon my dimpled knees;
Deliver me from jujubes.
And when my days of trial are done,
And my war with malted milks is won,
Let me stand with the heavenly throng
In a shining robe - size 44 long.
I can do it, Lord, if you'll show to me
The virtues of lettuce and celery;
If you'll teach me the evils of mayonnaise,
The sinfulness of Hollandaise.
Of Pasta a la Milannaise,
Potatoes a la Lyonnaise.
And crisp-fried chicken from the South,
Lord, if you love me, shut my mouth.
Chaos maximizes locally around me.
I'm going to have a hard time believing this, until we get a couple more labs to replicate the findings.
Just about every animal on earth, including us, produces copious amounts of RNAse, an enzyme that shreds RNA molecules. And while most enzymes are rather fragile, RNAse is unusally robust -- you can boil some RNAses for hours, and they will retain their activity. They're everywhere, on your skin, in your body -- and it's a pain in the butt when you're working with RNA (you put RNAse inhibitors in everything to keep them from chewing up your material).
It's almost as if it were being produced as some kind of defense mechanism against... hmm....
so tell me... why is Genetic Modification of food allowed?
Selective breeding over generations is genetic modification, and it's been going on for the past four millennia. Did you mean " recombinant genetic modification"?
what happens when someone decides to "leverage" food crops to produce drugs, and those accidentally cross-pollinate with the world's food supply?
Patent lawsuits like Monsanto v. Schmeiser.
2. If not, are those populations less sensitive to the effects?
And just to mention here, why call it "white" rice in the summary? Same genes, whole grain or not. TDA doesn't suggest that white rice puts more microRNA into the bloodstream. It doesn't make a distinction anywhere.
actually, you're largely what you drink (hydrogen & oxygen), followed by what you breath (oxygen, carbon and nitrogen) which makes up 96% of what you are..
You'll have to contact Hugo Boss. Ask for the Schutzstaffel catalog.
GMO's are harmless and good for you.
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
DNA is transcripted into RNA which is translated into proteins, which are the main structural components of life. MicroRNA binds to the RNA transcripts, preventing them from being translated into proteins. The article title is misleading because we usually consider DNA to be our genes, and MicroRNA affects gene expression rather than genes themselves. RNA interference, including interference by MicroRNA was discovered decades ago but no one has studied interference by foreign RNA in food. It's mostly been studied in the context of viruses or transgenic cells.
Frosty piss posts are worthless, GNAA posts are worthless and hurtful, but they are the least of this site's neuroses.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Boss
Evidently, the eponymous founder of Hugo Boss was indeed heavily involved with the Nazis, including as a uniform manufacturer.
However, the stuff-made-of-human-skin myth seems ironic considering the actual horrors of Nazi Germany.
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
That's strange, I don't remember eating any sexy beasts.
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
No, I think a fox and lox. But I would not eat it in a box.
Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
You suck cox.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
"Ye know why it's called a Kilt? Because I kilt the last man who called it a skirt!"
Also, I would rock a wizzards robe at work if not for the dress code.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!