owtluke Posted March 15, 2010 Posted March 15, 2010 I was curious if anyone has an idea how much the body genetically mutates over an average lifespan. Putting aside any ethical/moral issues, if people had tissue/genetic samples taken when they were born and froze these for use later in life, would the body still recognize it as 'self' or has it mutated so much over the years that it would now reject this original genetic makeup as a foreign substance? Knowing one's genetic makeup at birth would seem to be an ideal reference point as things only get worse as you age (from a genetic point of view). Would having access to such data not open up possibilities for fighting cancer? I'm totally disregarding costs and logistics, just wondering if this is something that might be possible or common in the future.
Greippi Posted April 5, 2010 Posted April 5, 2010 You could make a broad estimate using the error rate of DNA replication (1 in 50 million possibly, off the top of my head). But of course there are other factors that cause mutations in the genome - for example the incorperation of viral DNA. Smoking one cigarette will cause on average 15 mutations in a lung cell (typically 30,000 mutations are observed in a cancer cell).
Sisyphus Posted April 5, 2010 Posted April 5, 2010 But you as a whole don't mutate, since that happens on the cellular level. So an original, frozen cell wouldn't be any more genetically different than the various parts of you are different from one another. I also wouldn't say "things get worse as you age." A mutation is not necessarily bad - it's just a change.
dttom Posted April 5, 2010 Posted April 5, 2010 But you as a whole don't mutate, since that happens on the cellular level. So an original, frozen cell wouldn't be any more genetically different than the various parts of you are different from one another. I also wouldn't say "things get worse as you age." A mutation is not necessarily bad - it's just a change. plus there are recovery mecahnsim for DNA repairment. But I do think things get worse with aging, a mutation is not necessarily bad, but it can't be a good stuff for reasons like incompatibility of new change to existing body or the change occurs in tiny portion in a body, bad things got a chance with it like uncontrolled growth caused by inability to express apoptotic genes, hence the probability of getting bad thing with you should be longer if one lives longer.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now