The Holocaust epigenetics study was over-interpreted

http://epgntxeinstein.tumblr.com/post/127416455028/over-interpreted-epigenetics-study-of-the-week

by tokenadult • 11 years ago

92 37 11 years ago

epgntxeinstein.tumblr.com

1arity• 11 years ago

Whether it was "over-interpreted" or not -- some stressors methylate genes, and those mutations are passed on to descendants.

Does surviving the holocaust count as a stressor? Yes. Would going through that probably involve a bundle of stressors, of which some are likely to produce epigenetic mutations? Likely.

The author of this article is in the business of writing papers that are anti-trans-generational epigenetic inheritance. The author either doesn't believe it is possible, or doesn't believe to have seen evidence for it yet.

It's a useful counterpoint to the majority opinion, tho it's very much the opinion of someone peddling a particular line that happens to be the line their in the business of writing papers about.

The most interesting thing in this study was that the descendants of those who had experienced the holocaust seemed to have become more immune to the stressors their ancestors faced. That's a pretty clear case of the genome responding by becoming more fit, the occurrence of which has evolutionary advantage.

madaxe_again• 11 years ago

I wonder what an similar survey of the genetics of Palestinians living under occupation for five decades would show - and whether the epigenetic effect not only makes people more "fit" for dealing with trauma, but perhaps desensitised when it comes to inflicting trauma on others.

tome• 11 years ago

That snide comment seems unnecessary.

tormeh• 11 years ago

As bad as the Israeli occupation is, it's not even in the same order of magnitude in terms of per-human suffering.

stdbrouw• 11 years ago

Does surviving the holocaust count as a stressor? Yes. Would going through that probably involve a bundle of stressors, of which some are likely to produce epigenetic mutations? Likely.

So because the conclusion of the original study is probably sort-of-maybe okay-ish, we can excuse the shoddy research that was performed to get to that conclusion? I don't think that's how science works.

The final paragraph of the post reads

Every week there are uninterpretable epigenetics studies published, the Holocaust study is merely one of many, these authors are merely following prevailing beliefs in over-interpreting their data. However, every such study damages the ‘brand’ of epigenetics a little more. If we want human disease epigenetics to be sustainable as a field of research, we have got to start to do substantially better in designing, executing, interpreting, reviewing and funding these studies.

Being afraid that bad research might damage the reputation of the entire field of epigenetics doesn't seem like something I'd worry about too much if I didn't believe in epigenetics as a valid object of scientific study.

nextos2• 11 years ago

While the study might not be well designed and interpreted, may I ask why you don't believe in epigenetics?

x0054• 11 years ago

The original article is using a sample group which is just much too small to make any reasonable statistical correlation, and in it's conclusion is making claims about causation without even being able to prove correlation.

Mikushi• 11 years ago

The only clear case is that of bad science.

sharkbot• 11 years ago

I would suggest a change to your first sentence: "some stressors methylate genes, and those same genes may be methylated in descendants."

It is not a "mutation", at least not in the sense of a stable and heritable gene change. DNA methylation can be reversed, hence it is considered an epigenetic change, rather than a genetic change. The controversy over epigenetics seems to be about how long an epigenetic change can remain in a series of offspring, and how much of an impact an epigenetic change can have on the genetic material, the only long-term mechanism of heredity that we know of.

Caveat: IANABiologist

daemonk• 11 years ago

There are good reasons to not think trans-generational epigenetic inheritance is possible though. The main piece of evidence is the reprogramming that occurs after fertilization where epigenetic marks are erased and re-established.

You could maybe argue that that epigenetic machinery was transferred trans-generationally during cell division to help in re-establishing specific epigenetic marks, but that's not really an "informational" inheritance.

stefantalpalaru• 11 years ago

Politics is much more efficient than hard science at getting you research grants, so the researchers adapt their proposals and ultimately their results to the market.

gkya3• 11 years ago

After seeing this sort of research, I sometimes think that we are drowning in an excess amount of scientific information regarding more humane things. I think that such approach will not let us understand ourselves better.

astazangasta• 11 years ago

We need to broaden our epistemological horizons. The other day I was reading the wikipedia article on physical attractiveness; it is mostly a litany of controlled studies isolating various physical variables. This is rapidly becoming the only way we know how to think.

gkya3• 11 years ago

[... The scientific method] is rapidly becoming the only way we know how to think.

And for better or worse, it's not a way to think, it's a way to know and prove.

squozzer• 11 years ago

I am still fascinated by the possibility of genetic memory, but also heartened by the existence of skeptics. Looking forward to the debate, assuming it's a healthy one.

katelynsills• 11 years ago

"I really don’t like criticising colleagues, a tendency I’m guessing we all share in science."

This. This is everything that's wrong about modern science.

brighteyes• 11 years ago

I think there is plenty else that is wrong. For example:

* Corporate influence via funding studies (and not publishing the failures), as well as hiring away top researchers (e.g. Hinton by Google)

* The tenure system is vanishing, with more and more staff turning into non-tenured "associates", and fewer and fewer young hopefuls finding a successful career in science.

* Promotions are based on dubious publication metrics.

The Holocaust epigenetics study was over-interpreted

Related Stories