Slashdot Mirror


Scientists Discover That Exercise Changes Your DNA

HughPickens.com writes The human genome is astonishingly complex and dynamic, with genes constantly turning on or off, depending on what biochemical signals they receive from the body. Scientists have known that certain genes become active or quieter as a result of exercise but they hadn't understood how those genes knew how to respond to exercise. Now the NYT reports that scientists at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm have completed a study where they recruited 23 young and healthy men and women, brought them to the lab for a series of physical performance and medical tests, including a muscle biopsy, and then asked them to exercise half of their lower bodies for three months. The volunteers pedaled one-legged at a moderate pace for 45 minutes, four times per week for three months. Then the scientists repeated the muscle biopsies and other tests with each volunteer. Not surprisingly, the volunteers' exercised leg was more powerful now than the other, showing that the exercise had resulted in physical improvements. But there were also changes within the exercised muscle cells' DNA. Using technology that analyses 480,000 positions throughout the genome, they could see that new methylation patterns had taken place in 7,000 genes (an individual has 20–25,000 genes).

In a process known as DNA methylation, clusters of atoms, called methyl groups, attach to the outside of a gene like microscopic mollusks and make the gene more or less able to receive and respond to biochemical signals from the body. In the exercised portions of the bodies, many of the methylation changes were on portions of the genome known as enhancers that can amplify the expression of proteins by genes. And gene expression was noticeably increased or changed in thousands of the muscle-cell genes that the researchers studied. Most of the genes in question are known to play a role in energy metabolism, insulin response and inflammation within muscles. In other words, they affect how healthy and fit our muscles — and bodies — become. Many mysteries still remain but the message of the study is unambiguous. "Through endurance training — a lifestyle change that is easily available for most people and doesn't cost much money," says Sara Lindholm, "we can induce changes that affect how we use our genes and, through that, get healthier and more functional muscles that ultimately improve our quality of life."

56 comments

  1. What does this mean...? by martiniturbide · · Score: 2

    That we should exercise before trying to reproduce so we can improve the human race?

    1. Re:What does this mean...? by martiniturbide · · Score: 1

      ...so my son will became "KHAAAAAAN!"

    2. Re:What does this mean...? by prefec2 · · Score: 2

      No. The genes are already present. They only get activated when you exercise. Therefore, you should leave your basement and walk or run around your block for 45 minutes a day or alternatively walk or cycle to the pizza or Chinese place instead of delivery any you have the same improvement. However, if you do not desire a healthy and long life, and a more optimistic view on the world then please don't do it.

    3. Re:What does this mean...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So could changing ones thinking, behavior, or environment also change which genes are expressed?

    4. Re:What does this mean...? by morgauxo · · Score: 1

      We are all a little dumber for having read that comment.

    5. Re:What does this mean...? by germansausage · · Score: 1

      1. Your balls are not hollow containers, and they are not emptied no matter how many times in a row you masturbate. Sperm are produced in the testes, but are stored in the prostate. 2. Men produce new sperm constantly, but the genetic mutations increase with age, as do the rates of things like schizophrenia or autism in children of older men,

    6. Re:What does this mean...? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No. The genes are already present. They only get activated when you exercise. Therefore, you should leave your basement and walk or run around your block for 45 minutes a day or alternatively walk or cycle to the pizza or Chinese place instead of delivery any you have the same improvement. However, if you do not desire a healthy and long life, and a more optimistic view on the world then please don't do it.

      The study shows that the genes activate. It does not show that the activation results in a healthy and long life.

    7. Re:What does this mean...? by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      No it is a Nurture in the Nature vs Nurture debate is still very creditable.

      A lot of people like to put a lot of effort into Nature, because it means stuff that you are good at is because you yourself are unique enough to have such attributes, and any fault isn't your fault it was because you got the short straw in the gene pool.

      We don't like Nurture because it means we are responsible for ourselves and others. I am smart because I had good parents and teachers, and I choose to work hard at it. Not that I got the smart gene. Or I have a few extra pounds on me because I chose to eat that cupcake when I should have picked an Apple, or decided not to go to the gym. It is easier to say I have the Fat gene.

      I personally think Nurture is a larger influence in nature. Sure some factors my natural colors, gender, height and perhaps chances to get some generic conditions. I may not control, but if I went out more my skin would be darker, or stayed in more it may be lighter. When growing up if I exercised a different amount or had a different diet I may an inch taller or shorter.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    8. Re:What does this mean...? by itzly · · Score: 1

      How would you even start to quantify "larger" in the nature/nurture debate ?

    9. Re:What does this mean...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Sperm are produced in the testes, but are stored in the prostate. "

      LOLWUT!??? Citation, please, NOW.

    10. Re:What does this mean...? by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Testicles generate sperm. Prostate generates semen which then flows to testicles and mixes with sperm.

    11. Re:What does this mean...? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      So could changing ones thinking, behavior, or environment also change which genes are expressed?

      Yes. That is the interesting bit about DNA methylation. Lots of 'transient' things can change the structure of DNA. If you think about it a bit, it makes sense. The 'Central Dogma' (which for years has been barking up the wrong tree) states that DNA makes RNA which makes Protein and DNA loops back and makes itself. While certainly true, it is too coarse of an approximation to be really useful. DNA changes in response to the environment (the topic here), RNA amplifies and interferes with pretty darn near everything, the environment can directly act on germ cell lines (again, via DNA methylation).

      So yes, thinking (which at the molecular level requires at the very least RNA and protein production) can, through methylation and other mechanisms, control gene expression both in the organism and in progeny.

      Nature has had several billion years to mess around with this. It's fantastically complex

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    12. Re:What does this mean...? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      Not quite. Sperm (in humans) are stored in the epididymus.

      This post brought to you by the National Association of Biological Pedants.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    13. Re:What does this mean...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a feeling it's going to take more than running a 5k an hour before sacking down with a member of the opposite sex to "improve the human race".

      Researchers picked "young and healthy" subjects. Young and healthy people don't need the benefit of exercise as much as older people do. For instance, young'uns don't get winded walking up stairs as easily. Why not see what the effects are for older people? Especially for older people who haven't exercised for a large portion of their lives and are starting to, in order to improve their health?

    14. Re:What does this mean...? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Random samples of people.
      Classify them in groups of similar genetic attributes.
      Track development of these groups over time, record environmental differences.

      Correlate the environmental differences with final outcome.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    15. Re:What does this mean...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "That we should exercise before trying to reproduce so we can improve the human race?"

      No, it means, that next year, there will be an exercise pill for the rich.

    16. Re:What does this mean...? by itzly · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or take two different organisms, for instance a cucumber and a dog, and subject them to the same environment from birth, and see which one is better at fetching a ball.

    17. Re:What does this mean...? by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 2

      Furthermore, the summary headline saying that it changes your DNA is downright incorrect as no nucleotide sequences seem to be altered.

    18. Re:What does this mean...? by onkelonkel · · Score: 1

      This almost correct. Tadpoles swim to the epididymus, then are mixed with seminal fluid in the seminal vesicles (which are part of the prostate).

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    19. Re:What does this mean...? by clovis · · Score: 1

      Probably not,
      I may be wrong, ( and please correct me if I'm wrong ) but the spermatogonium you start out with duplicate themselves through your life and the only mutations come from copy errors during the mitosis and meosis stages; toxic chemicals, radiation and so on.

      I don't believe the methylation of DNA in muscle (or any other) cells can migrate to the spermatogonium. Nor can any other DNA change that occurs elsewhere in the body migrate into the reproductive cells.

    20. Re:What does this mean...? by ThePromenader · · Score: 1

      The DNA 'change' in exercised muscles is probably an altering in (or activation of) cell-division behaviour.

      --

      No, no sig. Really.

      ThePromenader
    21. Re:What does this mean...? by Arterion · · Score: 1

      I just read the wikipedia article about DNA methylation, and while much of it is over my head, the pedant in me seems to accept that the accept the language that the DNA is "changed". It doesn't change the sequence of the DNA, but it seems to change the composition of the individual nucleotides.

      --
      "That which does not kill us makes us stranger." -Trevor Goodchild
    22. Re:What does this mean...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is almost correct. Tadpoles don't swim to but mature in the epididymus for approximately 3 months, and seminal vesicles, although located near the prostate, are not a part of it but two separate organs. During ejaculation, a tiny amount of fluid from the epididymus (accounting for approx. 5% of total ejaculate volume) containing mature sperm moves through vas deferens, and mixes with the fluids from seminal vessicles (85%) and the prostate itself (10%) just before it's pushed outside through the urethra.

    23. Re:What does this mean...? by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      That makes no sense to me. The nucleotides are one of a pair of adenine/thymine, or guanine/cytosine yielding four possibilities for that nucleotide at protein transcription. If you changed the composition (i.e. flipping and/or replacing one) then you are changing the sequence.

      I only took college biology, so I'm not *that* adept at it, but I don't see how that can be considered "changing" the DNA. As far as I can tell it just activates certain genes that previously weren't activated (while still remaining unchanged) so that the previously inactive genes are now transcribing into proteins where previously they weren't being transcribed into anything (and were effectively unused, or "junk" DNA.)

    24. Re:What does this mean...? by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      I am smart because I had good parents and teachers, and I choose to work hard at it. Not that I got the smart gene.

      Or maybe you got the gene that responds better to instruction than others? Maybe others have genes that favour shorter attention spans, or favour hyper activity so can't sit still in a classroom, and hence aren't as equipped to learn complex subjects ?

      Or I have a few extra pounds on me because I chose to eat that cupcake when I should have picked an Apple,

      Or maybe your gene for triggering pleasure from sugar is stronger than others?

      or decided not to go to the gym.

      Lacked the gene that gets pleasure triggered by exercise

      It is easier to say I have the Fat gene.

      Easier, or maybe something like that actually exists?

      I personally think Nurture is a larger influence in nature.

      I think free will is over-rated.

      Sure some factors my natural colors, gender, height and perhaps chances to get some generic conditions. I may not control, but if I went out more my skin would be darker, or stayed in more it may be lighter. When growing up if I exercised a different amount or had a different diet I may an inch taller or shorter.

      All illusions of free will. All your thoughts and response to environment (eating, exercise, study, compliance to authority etc) can all be explained by nature. Nurture is the excuse people use when they want to feel like they had some control in the outcome. I've never seen any evidence of this.

  2. Summary needs to bring up the interesting parts. by fey000 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Meh, the summary doesn't bring up any of the new stuff.

    We *know* that exercise has an effect on the body. We *know* that exercising increases concentrations of growth hormones, anti-inflammatory responses, and metabolic rate adjusting factors. We *know* these adjustments are made through methylation patterns over enhancers/promoters.

    Furthermore, there is no *change* in the DNA. Any alterations that occur do so on the back-chain of the DNA, which is normal behavior as the backchain is modified by ALOT of different factors. No nucleotides are being mutated or swapped by exercising (unless you imbibe strange and unhealthy body building substances).

    Last, the adjustments made to the exercised cells are in *response* to the exercise rather than proactive as the summary suggests. It would after all be really freaky if your body started building up muscles *before* you started working out. That would actually freak me the hell out.

  3. Not really a suprise by itzly · · Score: 1

    We already knew that exercises causes changes in the body. Changes require proteins. Proteins are encoded on the DNA. So it's not really a surprising discovery that the relevant genes are being activated.

  4. Damnit, Lamarck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does that mean that Lamarckian inheritance is real?

    1. Re:Damnit, Lamarck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does that mean that Lamarckian inheritance is real?

      No, it does not.

  5. It doesn't change your DNA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Scientists Discover That Exercise Changes Your DNA

    In a process known as DNA methylation, clusters of atoms, called methyl groups, attach to the outside of a gene like microscopic mollusks and make the gene more or less able to receive and respond to biochemical signals from the body.

    Clearly it doesn't. It merely changes the expression of your DNA.

    1. Re:It doesn't change your DNA by SQL+Error · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Right. A more accurate headline would be .Scientists Discover That Exercise Doesn't Change Your DNA, Which We Already Knew.

    2. Re:It doesn't change your DNA by Graydyn+Young · · Score: 2

      A headline that would be both accurate and informative would be "Scientist Discover That Exercise Causes Change to Epigenetic Tags".

    3. Re:It doesn't change your DNA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly DNA here doesn't mean deoxyribonucleic acid. It must be the completely unrelated DNA from Marketese, as in "Innovation is in our DNA". Whatever that stands for.

    4. Re:It doesn't change your DNA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that wasn't discovered. It was already know. What these scientists did was map out the specific changes, thousands of them.

  6. Somethings wrong here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look at all those differences in the charts and table 2. They are nearly non existent yet the p-values are very small. The supposed sample size is 23... I wonder what they did.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3694844/pdf/pgen.1003572.pdf

    1. Re:Somethings wrong here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe not. I just underestimated how misleading p-values are.

  7. This would be news... by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

    Only if the changed DNA could be passed on. Lysenko would be proven right!

    1. Re:This would be news... by Primate+Pete · · Score: 2

      Since changed DNA is located only in the portion of the exerciser's body that was used in exercise, it seems clear that the best approach is to provide frequent endurance training for the organs of reproduction. After all, the DNA in your legs doesn't get passed on to your offspring.

    2. Re:This would be news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So Jack Black of Tenacious D is the trend setter here by doing his Cock Push-ups?

  8. Not really news by The+Real+Dr+John · · Score: 3, Informative

    Almost everything you do has an effect on DNA histone methylation, acetylation and other histone modifications. In order for the transcriptional complexes required for gene activation and transcription to gain access to DNA segments for copying (making messenger RNA) the histone complexes that protect DNA from damage must be opened up. So exercise, hormones, fasting, and even drinking alcohol will result in epigenetic DNA histone modifications associated with gene transcription. This has been known for many years now. It is not even slightly surprising that exercise would result in gene transcription, which requires histone modification. This is not "changing your DNA", it is modifying the proteins that protect DNA from damage (histones).

    --
    A brain is a terrible thing to waste... Mind? That's debatable.
  9. WTT (fuck the title) by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    Exercise does not change the DNA. It changes the expression of genes in the DNA

    1. Re:WTT (fuck the title) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wuck The Title?

  10. The relevant term is "epigenetics" by AnontheDestroyer · · Score: 1

    Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...

    If anyone was curious.

  11. Genetic changes as a result of development by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    ....aren't we skating a hairsbreadth from Lamarckism?
    I recognize that the article doesn't imply that these genetic changes have any impact on the reproductive genes, but is it absolutely impossible that these methylation changes have some impact - if even only generally, for example on overall fitness of the offspring - that would almost be Lamarckian?

    IANARG - I am not a reproductive geneticist - but as my amateur understanding is that a woman's ova are all in-place early in life, while a man's sperm are made anew regularly, I'd imagine this (hypothesized) impact could only apply to males' reproductive cells anyway?

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:Genetic changes as a result of development by itzly · · Score: 1

      Not quite, because the underlying mechanism that causes the expression of certain genes based on certain events evolved itself in Darwinistic process.

    2. Re:Genetic changes as a result of development by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Kinda depends on how you look at Lamarkian inheritance. While not the major driver in evolution, epigenetic changes (through, for example, DNA methylation) can do exactly what Lamark hypothesized.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:Genetic changes as a result of development by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Except being inheritable. Which was his whole point, such as it was.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  12. yoga study a few days ago by lkcl · · Score: 1

    ... haaaa, veery interesting: wasn't there an article on slashdot very recently that said that yoga apparently is a better cardiovascular work-out than aerobic exercise? and wouldn't it be fascinating if yoga activated DNA in different [much more beneficial] ways from aerobic exercise. meditation [deep breathing included] is *also* a form of exercise. wouldn't it be fascinating to find that there are actual *real* physiological benefits - at the cellular level - to all this so-called "mumbo jumbo" spiritual guru "nonsense", and that it all had *real* measureable benefits that *really did* prolong your life?

    1. Re:yoga study a few days ago by itzly · · Score: 1

      You'd first have to separate the physical exercise aspect of yoga from the spiritual mumbo jumbo, and do some experiments to see what part is actually causing the physiological benefits.

  13. Re:Summary needs to bring up the interesting parts by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Informative

    True, this isn't particularly earth shattering, but you are incorrect in stating that there is no change in DNA. Methylation covalently (stably) alters DNA. So it actually does create a different nucleotide, one that is recognized by the cell as different from the original. This COULD result in germ cell (ie, heritable) changes.

    There is absolutely no data to suggest that this particular set of methylation events has anything to do with reproduction or reproductive fitness, but mechanistically, it's possible. We are still pretty much working out the importance and scope of DNA methylation. In this particular instance, it is not at all clear that it does anything except alter gene expression - and we know that exercise causes gene expression changes. Those new biceps didn't just magically pop into being (unless you are photoshopped).

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  14. Misunderstanding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Methylation is not a "change in the DNA" but a mechanism for regulating gene expression. Only a change in the DNA sequence would qualify for the term used here.

  15. AGW deniers by Tetetrasaurus · · Score: 0

    = total lack of methlyation.

  16. an individual has 20-25,000 genes by Razed+By+TV · · Score: 1

    I guess it depends on how complex the individual is.

  17. Can we just activate the genes? by YoungManKlaus · · Score: 1

    Because why exercise if we could just give me a shot which does the same?