mirrored file at http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ For complete access to all the files of this collection see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php ========================================================== Heard melodies are sweet, but those unheard are sweeter ----- John Keats (1795-1821), English poet [LINK] In the previous articles we dwelt on the connection between defective genes and diseases. We also noticed some effects of the environment on the genes. Nonetheless the raison detre for the disease was the flawed gene. It is, however, not universally true that every trait has its origin in a gene. There are some instances of behavior like smoking, drinking etc., where some connection is being sought between the addiction and a gene-at-fault. Likewise, is it possible that certain traits like intelligence and ability to excel in fine arts arise from a gene or genes? We characterize such instances as abstract or speculative genes, for want of a better term. Let us examine three such cases. [LINK] Click on the above image to view the complete picture Music gene (?): Even when there is no music playing, some of us hear it inside our heads. True? No, we do not mean hearing voices. We mean the innate ability to produce and enjoy music. Could music have played a significant role in the development of the species? Some scientists have recently proposed that music may have been an evolutionary adaptation just like walking erect or speaking a language. Some others call it utter speculation. The general assumption is that music is just another invention like writing, or cave painting to make life more pleasant. Every culture has music built into its rituals. Brain imaging studies have shown that the right temporal lobe of the human brain is activated when people hear music. Brain specialization is a necessary but not a sufficient condition to claim that a function is biologically determined. There are arguments for and against the contribution of music towards evolution of species. Remove music from our lives and our species would still survive, some say. According to them music is not adaptive in the biological sense, i.e., it does not contribute to the propagation of species. Anything that increases an individuals chances of passing its genes along to the next generation is adaptive and in that sense music does not qualify to be called an evolutionary advantage. Sandra Trehub of the University of Toronto disagrees. She studies mothers as they sing to their babies. Mothers, sing to their babies the same way, at a high pitch, in a slow tempo (known as cauka kAlam in carnatic music parlance), and in a distinctive tone. Every culture and every tribe has its lullabies. They are so similar to suggest that music is not a human invention, according to Trehub. If we communicate with infants through music, it is probably an instinctual form of emotional connection between the mother and baby, perhaps not unlike breast feeding. Trehub also suggests that mothers who were better musicians had an easier time calming their babies. A happy baby who fell asleep easily and did not make a fuss was much more likely to survive into adulthood, especially in primitive societies. Their cries would not attract predators, and they and their mothers would get more rest, the argument goes. If a genetic predisposition to music appeared early in human history, those who possessed musical faculty would have produced more healthy offspring and would further help propagation of their clan. There is also the possibility that music is adaptive because it made us more attractive to members of the opposite sex, as seen in the case of the male species of animals and birds being more beautiful than the female which helps them attract the female to them. Darwin himself favored such an explanation for music but many scholars dismiss that idea because the traits designed to attract mates, such as the peacocks tail, the roosters crown, the lions mane, the canarys song, and the mooses antlers are displayed only by the male of the species while music is something that both men and women produce and enjoy. There are cases where music runs in the family. But one is not sure whether that is due to nature or nurture. However, we witness quite a few child prodigies who pick up an instrument when they are 3 years old and start playing melodies or display acute knowledge in classical music. Is it pure random genius tweaking the musical faculty in the childs brain or is there a music gene that expresses in such children? Nobody has discovered a gene or genes so far associated with music. The brain dedicates some precious space to music---generation as well as enjoyment. It may be genetic or just another invention. When the human genome is finally understood for all its content and functions, perhaps we will know if music has a genetic origin or not. [LINK] Click on the above image to view the complete picture Alcoholism: Here is a court scene. A drunk driver killed a young girl while she was riding her bike home from school one afternoon. At the trial, however, the jury unanimously voted to acquit the driver. How did the defense lawyer succeed? He provided evidence that the man had inherited the alcoholism gene and was uncontrollably predisposed to drinking. The driver was released. Was it a fair trial? It has long been known that alcoholism runs in families. But it had not been clear whether it was inherited or a result of environment. Now researchers are gathering evidence that inheritance plays a role and they have located likely neighborhoods for the genes that can lead to alcoholism. These genes are for risk but not for destiny. It is also proposed that alcoholism is a multi-gene phenomenon and not due to a mutation in a single gene. Ulrike Heberlein, geneticist at University of California, San Francisco, has tested fruit flies and found a genetic defect called cheapdate that causes certain flies to become intoxicated more readily than others. By using a device called an inebriometer, Heberlein and colleagues found that normal flies get intoxicated in about 20 minutes while the cheapdate flies do so in less than 15 minutes. The study of fruit fly genes is popular because of the remarkable similarity they bear to human genes. It is generally accepted that a sibling of an alcoholic is three to eight times as likely to develop alcoholism as an individual with no family history of the disease. However, this hypothesis has to accommodate environmental factors that augment the tendency. Differences in alcohol metabolizing (processing it chemically) enzymes and the genes that encode them are the best understood factors that influence drinking behavior and the risk of alcoholism. Alcohol is converted to acetaldehyde by an enzyme in the liver called Alcohol dehydrogenase and further converted to acetate by another enzyme called Aldehydye dehydrogenase. Acetate is then utilized by tissues outside the liver. The diseases, fatty liver, cirrhosis, and necrosis of the liver, are the result of excessive consumption of alcohol and terminal production of excess acetate in the liver leading to fatty liver and scarring of liver tissues jeopardizing the major functions of the liver. Researchers have found one gene that is protective against alcoholism. People of Far East Asian descent carry a mutation in the gene for the enzyme aldehyde dehydrogenase causing accumulation of acetaldehyde in the blood and tissues after drinking. These individuals experience facial flushing, headaches, palpitations, dizziness, and nausea soon after drinking. This feature prevents such folks from becoming alcoholics. There are two problems with alcoholism. One is the inebriation caused by the drinking and the attendant misbehavior including unruly incidents towards family. The second and more devastating consequence is the occurrence of liver diseases and premature death among alcoholics. One main benefit of identifying the alcoholism gene in people is the ability to avoid circumstances that may worsen conditions brought on by the gene. The remedy for such a condition would not be to fix the culprit gene but encourage such individuals with defective genes to make lifestyle adjustments such as avoiding alcohol consumption starting at a very early age. Sin gene (????): In an article on actions and consequences titled, As you sow so shall you reap we indicated that one could think of a genetic relationship for the saying, (peRROr kuRRam makkaL thalai mEl), i.e., the sins of the parents are visited upon the children. There is currently not even a remote connection between the genes and the consequences of the commission of a sin. However, let us stretch our imagination a little bit. There is a Thamizh saying, arasan anRu kollum, dheivam ninRu kollum (The king inflicts punishment instantly while God does so in the distant future). Suppose one commits a sin and escapes the punishment oneself. Is it possible that the person is haunted by his act all his life? Let us say, probably so. Then, does the mental cud-chewing cause any chemical reaction within the body (--actually thought processes are essentially chemical reactions within the central nervous system) which can have a reverse effect on the germ line of that person so as to affect his offspring? Can we say that birth defects in children could be such a consequence? According to the germ-plasm theory of heredity, the bodys material, soma, is entirely separate from the hereditary material called the germ-plasm and that the germ line is impervious to agents from the rest of the bodily tissues. However, there appears to be a crack in this apparently solid foundation of genetic theory.