It isn’t often that I’d agree with something published in an editorial in a British newspaper, but I do agree with this one. I’ve been concerned for some time about the implications of genetic privacy, and if we want to keep from being victimized (e.g., by being denied insurance or employment) on account of our genetic profile, we need to get a system of strong genetic privacy laws in place.
Everybody has a gene that predisposes them to something bad lurking somewhere in their genetic code.
A thoughtful editorial by a law professor on the impact that new technologies (particularly new reproductive technologies) are having and will continue to have in the future. Raises a lot of questions that need answering.
Also mentions a TV show (Century City) that it sounds like I’m going to have to check out.
Favorite quote from the editorial:
I asked my law students whether a person with plant or animal genes would still be protected by the US Constitution. One replied, “If it walks like a man, quacks like a man, and photosynthesizes like a man, it is a man.”
When I was a boy, I remember seeing a film adaptation of Beauty and the Beast (no, not the Disney version; this was a black and white made long before that), in which as a sign of his love the Beast intimidated a rosebush all night until it gave him a blue rose for Beauty–not a purple rose or a kind-of-blue rose, but a true blue rose.
I don’t know whether this is in the book (since I’ve never read it), but apparently the search for a true, blue rose is a major fascination of rose growers.
Now, it is being reported, scientists are on the verge of making one. It turns out that some scientists doing research on liver enzymes found a gene that, it is thought, will turn roses blue once it is inserted into their genetic code.
If it works, I’ll certainly order some.
When I was a boy, I remember seeing a film adaptation of Beauty and the Beast (no, not the Disney version; this was a black and white made long before that), in which as a sign of his love the Beast intimidated a rosebush all night until it gave him a blue rose for Beauty–not a purple rose or a kind-of-blue rose, but a true blue rose.
I don’t know whether this is in the book (since I’ve never read it), but apparently the search for a true, blue rose is a major fascination of rose growers.
Now, it is being reported, scientists are on the verge of making one. It turns out that some scientists doing research on liver enzymes found a gene that, it is thought, will turn roses blue once it is inserted into their genetic code.
If it works, I’ll certainly order some.
‘Member how I said in a prior post that “The form of the calories don’t matter that much in and of themselves. A thousand calories of protein or fat or carbohydrates is still a thousand calories”? In saying that I was conceding an element of truth to a common dieting axiom: “a calorie is a calorie is a calorie.” This axiom is often used by those who tout calorie restriction as the key to successful fat loss. These folks would say that it doesn’t matter whether the calories you take in are in the form of fat, carbohydrates, or protein. All that counts for losing weight is losing calories.
But while it’s true (by definition) that one calorie represents as much energy as another calorie, that is much more to the story than this. As I went on to point out,
the type of calories does have an effect on the body’s metabolism because the body has to do different things in order to burn different macro-nutrients (i.e., protein, fat, and carbohydrates). If you change the ratio of the macro-nutrients you are eating, your body’s metabolism changes in order to digest and/or store them.
I’d like to document that now by citing a classic study published in 1956 by Alan Kekwick and Gaston Pawan (“Calorie Intake in Relation to Body Weight Changes in the Obese,” Lancet, July 28, 1956, 155-161). These researchers divided their test subjects into three groups, each of which ate a thousand calories a day that were principally composed of one of the three macronutrients. One group got a thousand calories a day that were 90% carbohydrate calories, another got a thousand calories a day that were 90% protein calories, and the third group got a thousand calories a day that were 90% fat calories. If the “a calorie is a calorie” maxim applied to weight loss, these groups should have lost the same amount of weight–or at least approximately the same amount of weight.
They didn’t.
The 90% protein group lost an average of .6 pounds per day of the study. The 90% fat group lost .9 pounds per day. And the 90% carbohydrate group actually gained .24 pounds per day.
What explains this?
The basic explanation is that your metabolism adjusts to the input you give it. If you put in primarily fat, it triggers one set of responses as your body gears up to utilize the fat and manage its energy output. If you put in carbs, it triggers a different set of respones. And if you put in protein, it triggers a third set. These have an impact on how much weight a person will lose. As the 1956 Kekwick study showed (and as subsequent studies have reinforced), if you give your body fat in the absence of carbohydrates then your body will go into fat burning mode. If you give it protein in the absence of carbohydrates then it will do the same, though the rate of fat burning will be less efficient.
On the other hand, if you give it primarily carbohydrates then it will slam on the brakes for fat burning and start hoarding the fat it has, even slowing your metabolism so that it can generate excess calories to try to hoard more nutrients since the sudden absence of fat from your diet has convinced your body that some kind of famine is going on and you need to go into emergency survival mode.
Subsequent studies have confirmed and amplified the Kekwick and Pawan results, and I’ll try to document some of those in future entries, but the basics were right there in the 1956 study.
Man, this is the kind of thing I am SOOO tempted to bid on.
Always need more souls for my collection.
Man, this is the kind of thing I am SOOO tempted to bid on.
Always need more souls for my collection.
A Mahayana Buddhist community recently issued a revised Pratimoksha (Buddhist Monk Code), equivalent to a rule governing Christian religious order. The list is strikingly up-to-date in some ways. Among other offenses, it lists:
15. A bhikshu who keeps in his possession toxic cultural items such as worldly films, video tapes, music and electronic games commits an offence which involves Release and Expression of Regret.
16. A bhikshu who keeps a television, video player, karaoke player, electronic games machine and any other kind of equipment used for showing worldly films, listening to worldly music and playing electronic games commits an offence which involves Release and Expression of Regret.
18. A bhikshu, who invests money, or buys stocks and shares, commits an offence which involves Release and Expression of Regret.
[From a later list of lesser offenses:]
39. A bhikshu who goes as a spectator to sporting events, worldly cinema or worldly concerts commits an offence for which he must express regret.
41. A bhikshu who watches television programs whose content is toxic because it waters the seeds of fear, violence, anger, hatred, killing and craving commits an offence for which he must express regret.
42. A bhikshu who uses the internet without another fellow-practitioner sitting beside him as a protection against losing himself in toxic programs, commits an offence for which he must express regret.
43. A bhikshu who makes use of or consumes images or sounds which excite sexual desire, from the internet or the telephone [NOTE: That’s apparently a reference to phone sex] commits an offence for which he must express regret.
44. A bhikshu who has his private e-mail account with the result that he spends an inordinate amount of time in making unnecessary communications or communications which foster attachment commits an offence for which he must express regret.
46. A bhikshu who plays electronic games including those on the computer, commits an offence for which he must express regret.
47. A bhikshu who gambles or bets on football matches, horse races or car races and so on, commits an offence for which he must express regret.
48. A bhikshu, who plays the lottery commits an offence for which he must express regret.
49. A bhikshu, who drives in a careless and negligent manner, swerving on corners, shooting forward or racing with another car, commits an offence for which he must express regret.
50. A bhikshu who uses an expensive and flashy car which draws the attention of people, commits an offence for which he must express regret.
52. A bhikshu, who has cosmetic surgery in order to improve his appearance, commits an offence for which he must express regret.
It’s interesting to read the Pratimoksha because, like the law of any group, it expresses what the group considers important–as well as what they as a group have problems with. It’s also interesting to read it from a canonical perspective, as this kind of rule is functions basically as the Buddhist equilvalent of canon law (as well as the equivalent of a monastic rule). It has a variety of offenses of various grades with various punishments (including permanent expulsion from the monastery) as remedies.
Human nature is much the same everywhere, and so it is not surprising to find rules about managing the order’s financial resources, modesty, anger management, and sexual offenses. There are even regulations against the Buddhist equivalent of doffing your clericals and dressing as a layman:
63. A bhikshu who when going into a town, village or market puts on lay dress or wears a wig, commits an offence for which he must express regret.
Some of the items could be found with only slight variation in the rule of a Christian order. Others, from a Christian perspective, are extreme or simply incomprehensible, for example:
60. A bhikshu who enters a wine or coffee bar where the lighting is dim in order to quench his thirst or to sit and watch people coming and going, commits an offence for which he must express regret.
61. A bhikshu who goes to a lay person’s house or a restaurant to attend a birthday party or a wedding reception, commits an offence for which he must express regret.
This is definitely going into my regularly-read blog list.
This is definitely going into my regularly-read blog list.