Re: Have any of you done DNA testing ?
I don't know a lot about Neanderthals but am interested in them. It was once assumed they became extinct because they were less intelligent than Homo Sapiens (neither the premise nor the conclusion are necessarily true) or because they lost out in competition with Homo Sapiens but given the number of different reasons a species can go extinct, these hypotheses represent but a small fraction of the possibilities. I was curious about whether Neanderthals could be cloned, so I did a google search and enough people were curious about the subject that there are numerous articles. Although there are no intact Neanderthal cells, scientists know what their genome looks like and this article discusses starting with human dna and using crispr technology to manipulate the dna to where it looks like a neanderthal genome. https://news.nationalgeographic.com/...minid-science/
Beyond this science fiction fantasy, which is probably unethical to follow up on, it's difficult to glean lots of insights into how neanderthals lived. Am definitely interested in the book Sukumvit Boy recommended...
https://archive.archaeology.org/1003...nderthals.html
Re: Have any of you done DNA testing ?
I'm so happy to have sparked some interest .This is ,afterall, a great science detective story that is relevant to us all.
Even for people who don't particularly enjoy reading ,now there is so much interesting and informative stuff out there such as TED Talks available to everyone . If you have Netflix check out " Great Human Odyssey" also well done.
4 Attachment(s)
Re: Have any of you done DNA testing ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stavros
Pleased to hear you have enjoyed Rutherford's book. Two interesting developments have caused much debate here -the claim that Cheddar Man, the remains of a Mesolithic (c9,1200 years ago) skeleton found in Cheddar Gorge in Somerset in the south-west of England, had a black skin. To the Wikipedia article I link a more satirical article on it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheddar_Man
https://www.salon.com/2018/02/12/che...-supremacists/
The other is the claim that Neanderthal Man was capable of producing 'art', something that had previously been dismissed, or that the 'cave paintings' found in France and Spain were the first example of homo sapiens producing art. The question, 'is it art'? has followed the claim that
a stencilled hand in Maltravieso cave is at least 66,700 years old – a date reached by testing the calcite deposits that have encrusted it over the millennia.
But as Jonathon Jones argues,
The significance of the new dating for Europe’s oldest cave art is not that it makes Neanderthals the inventors of art. It is actually bigger than that. The reason it is so eerie to think of a Neanderthal making a hand-image is that the painted hands – not to mention bison, horses and mammoths – found in European caves have come to be seen as the moment when the modern human mind itself is born: the first evidence not just of the intelligence of Homo sapiens but our capacity to imagine and dream, to reflect, in short to possess consciousness. What does it mean if another kind of human species shared those traits? Is there nothing special about us at all?
https://www.theguardian.com/artandde...es-every-human
Less controversially perhaps, homo sapiens inherited reflexivity from the neanderthals with whom they mated and evolution did the rest. It is I think accepted that homo sapiens did not invent fire or the use of fire to cook food, one of the key differences between us and primates such as Chimpanzees. This article from New Scientist offers a fascinating insight into why we eat cooked food and how it has been such a crucial part of the evolution of humans beings, and not just because food tastes better when it has been transformed by fire.
https://www.newscientist.com/article...t-cooked-meal/
Yes stavros , you bring up some very interesting recent developments that have been the focus of scientific inquiry covered in the journal Science just a few weeks ago and elsewhere regarding our previous assumptions that Neanderthals were incapable of "Art" and creative thinking.
There is simply no question that some of the cave paintings are art and breathtaking art at that , with a sophistication worthy of the likes of Picasso or Mondrian.
Attachment 1061019Attachment 1061020Attachment 1061021Attachment 1061022
Re: Have any of you done DNA testing ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
sukumvit boy
There is simply no question that some of the cave paintings are art and breathtaking art at that , with a sophistication worthy of the likes of Picasso or Mondrian.
I am not sure about that, for two reasons. The first is that we don't know what the intention was when stencilled marks or the painting of animals were made. It is conceivable that the images were worshipped, if not as Gods, then as something 'the gods' gave them in order to eat good food and be healthy. But we don't know if they believed in any form of God. The second is that art is a conscious attempt to express something, in that form rather than another, so we don't know if the painting of an animal on a wall was the accompaniment to a song, a chant, a speech, and invocation.
I cannot agree with your last comment because there is no comparison between Picasso and Mondrian and ancient paintings, their percepts being so utterly different. Mondrian did produce figurative art in his youth before becoming an abstract painter (I have a print of his White Rose in a Tumbler next to a Van Gogh on my wall above the CD's). Moreover, in Picasso's case, he regularly used a 'robust' or crude image of the Bull to express himself and his sexual urges/fears which again may be quite different from what the cave painters were doing. His comment on seeing the paintings in Lascaux 'we have invented nothing' is somewhat superficial, as he repeatedly invokes other painters in his work, particularly Velasquez and El Greco, though quite a few people dismiss Picasso as unoriginal, or a fraud for this and other reasons. Art often refers to itself and mimics, plagiarises, copies etc -in this case, we cannot know what the meaning of the cave paintings was at the time, but it does register the fact that whether there are examples from Neanderthals or Homo Sapiens, it suggests we alone have some ability to think and express ourselves reflexively, and transform thoughts and feelings into objects or signs that can be seen and that are permanent, and using tactics such as symbolism in art. The one exception may be the expressions in sound that Dolphins make, or Whales, but we do not yet know how complex these exchanges are.
When one turns to other forms of expression, oral poetry/recitation becomes the key mode of transmission of 'ideas' before writing and printing, and thus uses repetition as well as symbolism, allegory, simile and so on -because for some reason, people remember things this way. It is the reason why religious texts ought not to be taken literally, using literary devices so people can remember what the texts say, just as any number of people know the words to a pop song but can't remember every word of an email or a letter they received from a friend or relative.
Re: Have any of you done DNA testing ?
For all you crazy kids out there, here is one page of my gene test which scans my genes and gives you an idea how you'll respond to about 250 popular medications. I chose this page because I was on Lexapro for a few years, which turns out to be a bad idea. The only other med I flagged was a stomach medication, in the yellow area. Four Hundred Bucks, for a little peace of mind. I went by the Library today and looked for the Rutherford book, they had two copies, both checked out. Must be a good book!
https://preview.ibb.co/gJBmax/geno.jpg
private picture upload
Re: Have any of you done DNA testing ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
buttslinger
For all you crazy kids out there, here is one page of my gene test which scans my genes and gives you an idea how you'll respond to about 250 popular medications. I chose this page because I was on Lexapro for a few years, which turns out to be a bad idea. The only other med I flagged was a stomach medication, in the yellow area. Four Hundred Bucks, for a little peace of mind. I went by the Library today and looked for the Rutherford book, they had two copies, both checked out. Must be a good book!
https://preview.ibb.co/gJBmax/geno.jpg
private picture upload
Very interesting ,buttslinger, thank you. I didn't know about the Inova healthcare system. You're out there getting medical care from the future ,lucky guy . Forgive me for seeming nosey, but does your healthcare insurance pay for that service ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inova_Health_System
5 Attachment(s)
Re: Have any of you done DNA testing ?
Very interesting observations ,stavros.
I admit that I may have gotten a little carried away in my comparison of Neanderthal art with the likes of Picasso and Mondrian ,lol. My point is just that, given the materials they had available , Neanderthal art is amazingly sophisticated.
Also wanted to mention that everybody who visits Chauvet caves is immediately struck by the acoustics , particularly musicians and vocalists , and remains if Neanderthal flutes have been found , so it is not surprising that there is some speculation ,as you mentioned, that the caves may well have been used for some sort of animistic ceremonies.
And finally , I enjoy drawing and painting in water color myself , particularly botanical studies and Mondrian's early botanical watercolors are amazing and some of my favorites.
Attachment 1061178Attachment 1061179Attachment 1061180Attachment 1061181Attachment 1061182
Re: Have any of you done DNA testing ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
sukumvit boy
Nope, I'm not that lucky. Although I did get it on sale.
Re: Have any of you done DNA testing ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
buttslinger
Nope, I'm not that lucky. Although I did get it on sale.
I ended up settling for 330 out of pocket. It was useful as a guide but there were a few recommendations by the company that were inconsistent with clinical experience. For instance, I think they found that I have a version of the serotonin transporter gene that indicates ssris should not be very effective. If afterall, serotonin is already cleared from the post-synaptic cell slowly, I should not get a robust response from something that keeps it there longer since it is already lingering there. And yet, that's the only class of drugs that has been helpful to me. So it's more a guide than anything. On the other hand there was some useful guidance for how I metabolize drugs. I have never responded well to bupropion (wellbutrin), and the reason they suggest is that I metabolize the parent drug very quickly, but it has an active metabolite that sticks around and causes a lot of side effects when it builds up. It makes sense since it's always agitated me a little bit and the benefits have been only subtle.
I think the main benefit I got out of it is that I got it out of the way so I know there's nothing anomalous there and I can take my methylfolate supplement.
For an example of why the information usually cannot tell you absolutely that a drug is not worthwhile for you is based on the type of information you're getting. If you metabolize something quickly or slowly, that will often mediate dosage and side effect profile but doesn't rule out that it's uniquely effective for you but that there are some challenges with its administration. There were a couple of genes for noradrenergic receptor sensitivity, but again, that might affect dosage but not rule out all drugs that affect norepinephrine. Do they tell you why they rule out the medicines they do? It is unlikely to be serotonin transporter since escitalopram is in the same class as sertraline and fluoxetine, so maybe it has to do with metabolism.
Re: Have any of you done DNA testing ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
broncofan
For an example of why the information usually cannot tell you absolutely that a drug is not worthwhile for you is based on the type of information you're getting.
The point I'm making is that when they recommend the drugs, that's sort of their proprietary rubric, but your doctor might better know how to use the raw information. It might mean starting a drug slowly or taking a smaller dose or avoiding certain combinations. So, obviously I'm not recommending anything except that your doctor can use the info better than Inova and might actually go against some of their recommendations while taking them on board! Good luck!!