Nascent, innate, intrinsic, and biofunctional are among the “weasel words” used by theorists who ignore the fact that all life-sustaining energy comes from the sun via hydrogen-atom transfer in DNA base pairs in solution. See how Jon Lieff continues to misrepresent that fact, by placing everything known about RNA-mediated cell type differentiation back into the context of evolution.

Like all pseudoscientists, he starts with energy but fails to mention where the energy came from or where it goes when virus-driven energy theft is linked from mutations and genomic entropy to all pathology via base pair changes and RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions in viruses that stabilize genes in the viruses at the expense of genomic stability in all living genera.

Individual Cell Clocks and Immunity

Energy from the sun is transformed into energy and material for the cell to use in sync to these rhythms. The rhythms also are related to how the cell develops in particular organs and responses to damage and distress. It is not yet clear how these individual unique 24 hour clocks in each cell translates to the rhythms of the entire animal. In evolution, the development of these clocks appears to be vital to provide the needed resources for DNA repair at the proper time of day.

My comment to Jon Lieff’s blog site: Thank you for helping to deliver Schrodinger’s, Turing’s, and Witzany’s message about the anti-entropic virucidal effects of sunlight on alternative RNA splicings, which serious scientists know link autophagy to all biodiversity via RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions.

Please stop placing top-down causation into the context of evolution since no experimental evidence suggests that energy-dependent effects occur outside the context of the de novo creation of G protein-coupled receptors and the physiology of reproduction in species from microbes to humans.

Also, Suzan Mazur acknowledged me and my domain, RNA-mediated.com as sources of information on biologically-based cause and effect for comparison to pseudoscientific nonsense about evolution in: Royal Society: The Public Evolution Summit

It would be great if you would also acknowledge my works as your source of information or acknowledge others whose life’s works are presented in your blog posts.

Thank you for your acknowledgement more than 3 years ago in:

Alternative RNA Splicing in Evolution

My comment:

In our 1996 Hormones and Behavior review, we wrote:”Small intranuclear proteins also participate in generating alternative splicing techniques of pre-mRNA and, by this mechanism, contribute to sexual differentiation in at least two species, Drosophila melanogaster and Caenorhabditis elegans.”

From Fertilization to Adult Sexual Behavior

The alternative splicings are nutrient-dependent and appear to be enabled by the experience-dependent de novo creation of olfactory receptor genes, which enable additional receptor-mediated nutrient uptake and the metabolism of nutrients to species-specific blends of pheromones that control reproduction in species from microbes to man.

Your focus on the importance of pre-mRNA and alternative splicing is exemplary, especially in the context of neuronal plasticity.

C. elegans is the model organism of neurogenic niche construction that links nutrient-dependent ecological and pheromone-controlled social niche construction to socio-cognitive niche construction in vertebrates and invertebrates. See for review:

Human pheromones and food odors: epigenetic influences on the socioaffective nature of evolved behaviors

What you are helping to detail is self-assembly with evidence of olfactory/pheromonal self-organization that is currently missing from evolutionary theory, which attributes speciation to mutation-initiated natural selection even though there is no experimental evidence for that (as I mentioned elsewhere).

On 10/27/13 Jon Lieff wrote:

I very much appreciate your comments on pheromone communication and its rapid and critical link to the olfactory brain. I look forward to any current references and future work to help understand the immune brain connection as well as communication in general.

Thanks

Jon Lieff

See for comparison: What is life when it is not protected from virus driven entropy

See the citation to: UV-Induced Charge Transfer States in DNA Promote Sequence Selective Self-Repair

The full text is free. Compare the claims to Jon Lieff’s claim:

In evolution, the development of these clocks appears to be vital to provide the needed resources for DNA repair at the proper time of day.

See also Peter Berean’s claims about bio-functional information and his claims that energy is not information in the context of his denigrations of my life’s works.

See also: Guardians of the Blood Brain Barrier by Jon Lieff

Just curious where most of your information comes from? I’m a graduate student and would love the primary sources for reference!

See also: Scientists say your “mind” isn’t confined to your brain, or even your body

In math, complex systems are self-organizing, and Siegel believes this idea is the foundation to mental health. Again borrowing from the mathematics, optimal self-organization is: flexible, adaptive, coherent, energized, and stable. This means that without optimal self-organization, you arrive at either chaos or rigidity—a notion that, Siegel says, fits the range of symptoms of mental health disorders.

In biology, the idea that mathematical models are relevant to the required links from ecological variation to energy-dependent ecological adaptation is considered in the context of a joke, or parodies.

See for comparison: Oppositional COMT Val158Met effects on resting state functional connectivity in adolescents and adults

My comment: Val158Met is an amino acid substitution. Its function is known to be affected by a functional single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in COMT (G-to-A base-pair substitution) leading to a methionine (Met) valine (Val) substitution at codons 108/158 (COMT Val158Met). Carriers of the Met allele have been found to display a fourfold decrease in enzymatic activity compared to Val allele carriers going along with an increase of prefrontal DA activity (Lachman et al. 1996; Lotta et al. 1995).

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

error: Content is protected !!