marek

Sorry to necro this thread, but it is my favorite topic. Attributing genes as a cause for any type of socioeconomic issue is the ultimate taboo for the ruling class of western society. It is a thought crime, where even discussing the very idea can get you in a ton of trouble. The very premise of genuine genetic causes undermines much of ruling thought and doctrine. Of course, it's also completely true. In my mind, some form of eugenics is the key to the problems of humanity. It is literally the most important issue I can think of. The issue for me isn't if we should pursue eugenics, but what are the best actions to take. The low tech solution of the past was to control the breeding patterns of others by force or law. Even as a passionate eugenics advocate, I don't want to do anything that involves violence or intense coercion. This is a dead end, IMO. The more realistic route is genetic engineering. Create completely opt-in treatments to enhance offspring. If you can sell parents a treatment to make their future children, smarter, healthier, or more physically fit, people will find a way to pay you for it and they will be grateful for the opportunity. As I see it, the biggest roadblocks are technical engineering considerations, not politics or public opinion. Once the engineer finds a way, the rest of the world will follow. It is the age of the engineer

The short answer: there must a connection between physical brain structure and intelligence (and personality), but today's science doesn't know what that is. Our knowledge of the brain and the mechanisms of thought are much too primitive to answer this. It's an extremely important question, lots of people are working on various steps in this direction.

As I understand this: a fertilized zygote inherits one set of chromosomes from the egg cell and a second set from the sperm. However, despite the fact that the egg cell only contributes one set of chromosomes to a fertilized zygote, the egg cells in the ovaries actually have two full sets of chromosomes (diploid), and are halted in prophase I of meiosis. During ovulation and fertilization, the egg cells complete meiosis and shed three sets of chromosomes as polar bodies while retaining the one set of chromosomes that are contributed towards the zygote. The piece that has be confused is this: Egg cells are considered gametes, gametes are haploid, yet egg cells are diploid except for a brief moment during the fertilization process. This seems to be self-contradictory. Can someone explain this? thanks!

Homework Question: When maternal oxygen is transferred to the fetus and fetal CO2 is passed back, how does this affect the maternal dissociation curve? Does this shift increase the transfer of oxygen to the fetus? --------------------------- My thinking is that the O2 transfer to the fetus will obviously reduce maternal oxygen binding and plasma O2 partial pressure, while CO2 transfer from the fetus will raise maternal CO2 partial pressure. I don't see why the O2 association/disassociation curve itself will change. Also, regarding the second question: obviously O2 transfer is O2 transfer so it will obviously affect it. Will CO2 transfer affect O2 transfer? Will CO2 transfer affect O2 partial pressure? I am not sure.