Fusion of 2 sisters into a single woman suggests human identity not in our DNA

https://english.elpais.com/science-tech/2024-05-08/the-fusion-of-two-sisters-into-a-single-woman-suggests-that-human-identity-is-not-in-our-dna.html

by bookofjoe • 2 years ago

16 8 2 years ago

english.elpais.com

01HNNWZ0MV43FF• 2 years ago

I didn't know anyone thought that. I would certainly be someone else if I were born with the same DNA but in another family or country or decade

thatguy0900• 2 years ago

Eugenics has a really long history and was very popular not too long ago. Even Elon musk believes in it https://jill.substack.com/p/musk-the-father

octopoc• 2 years ago

Would you also be someone else if you were born in the same family, country, and decade but with different DNA? Or would you be the same person?

bayouborne• 2 years ago

non-paywalled - https://archive.ph/R7s7J

Gormo• 2 years ago

What specifically does "human identity" mean?

dyauspitr• 2 years ago

What is identity? What difference does it make if she is a chimera or two or five people, she’s an aggregate of whatever proteins that get expressed for whatever part of her body.

jokethrowaway• 2 years ago

How come these altruistic cells end up reproducing and favoring their offspring? I still see Dawkins's point as valid.

Genes are responsible for some behaviours, they are certainly not EVERYTHING there is to human identity.

Saying there is nothing in the DNA which gives us 5 fingers is incorrect.

Researchers in Chicago, Dr. Neil Shubin and his team, demonstrated that two genes -- hoxa13 and hoxd13 -- are responsible for the formation of fin rays and our fingers [...]
Yacine Kherdjemil demonstrated that by reproducing the fish-type regulation for the hoxa11 gene, mice develop up to seven digits per paw, i.e., a return to ancestral status.

http://thescienceexplorer.com/nature/researchers-explain-how...

dekhn• 2 years ago

Title does not match article, article does not match the research, and the scientist making the claim is saying something that, if true, would require absolutely rewriting everything about evo-devo biology.

I believe the article was really written to publicize the scientist's book, "The Master Builder", https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/15/books/review/the-good-vir...

The only counterexample to the mainstream position that I can think of is not chimeric individuals (which are remarkable, but mainly a case for how accomodating of variation the existing biological systems are) but maternal factors- components in the egg cell that are not DNA, but contribute greatly to the phenotype of the embryo and resulting individual.

Really the complaint is about the gene-centric view put forward by many- see The Selfish Gene for the best argument for the gene-centric (rahter than "genome-centric") view.

Fusion of 2 sisters into a single woman suggests human identity not in our DNA

Related Stories