Consciousness Of The Germ Plasma

Na sorry, here I can't interpret the question to suit my own reading so I best shut up this time. Hey, thanks for asking anyway.

urangutan,:confused:

Do you really need to post to say you having nothing to say?:confused:

At anyrate urangutan, welcome to the forum, glad to see you getting your feet wet. boagie

It was a response that followed from the disease thread I commented on, where I wasn't sure I was responding correctly. I just felt that here I should confirm before I went off on a different tangent again. Sorry for missbehaving.

VideCorSpoon;

:)Your is a most impressive post, but, my referance was to a BBC lecture on the topic, if I can find it again, I shall list the link to it. If the energy in question is there maintaining the germ-plasma, why on earth would it be anymore damaging to be there in opposite proportions to do the maintenance work of the body fighting free radicals, carcinogens and doing repairs, we are not talking of an increase in energy but a realocation of said energy. It would seem that the genes are not so much interested in you as an individual but interested mainly in renewing the form. At anyrate I shall look for that lecture and post it if I can. It would seem god's design is just a tad faulty from an individual perspective, though obviously it is not the only perspective.


find here said lectures

BBC - Radio 4 - Reith Lectures 2001 - The End of Age

:)They are all interesting, however the lecture on, SEX AND DEATH, deals directly with the problem of the soma[body] and the germ-plasma--enjoy!

Boagie,
First of all, I'm honestly not exactly sure what you mean by germ plasma. I've really only run across that word used in reference to grains -- certainly never in the medical or medical scientific literature. But that's immaterial. If you're referring to the liquid, macromolecular, ionic, and energetic constituents of cells, then from a purely biological and biochemical point of view consciousness is a nonissue. Every biological system is to some degree energetically inefficient, but every biological system requires energy to function and to maintain itself. A self-regulating biological system that self-regulates by virtue of certain mechanisms is not conscious any more than your thermostat is conscious by turning on or off your AC based on room temperature.

Aside from the fact that that is a potentially toxic dose, there is a massive meta-analysis by the Cochrane database that shows almost no benefit to vitamin C supplementation (in a well-nourished population without dietary deficiency) except a clinically meaningless shortening of URI duration (under 24 hours). And that is the best evidence there is -- nothing is more comprehensive or rigorous than the Cochrane database. But considering that vitamin C, being a supplement, is not regulated by the FDA, people make all kinds of hyperbolic statements about it that are completely unfounded. And for every weak 'beneficial' trial you show me about vitamin C, I can match you with non-beneficial trials of similar quality.

We're all interested to see what comes of resveritrol, but hold your horses on the twenty to thirty year prediction. I can tell you that I will never prescribe it or even recommend it until we have good efficacy and safety data, and for the moment we have neither. The problem with overhyping drugs is we get into the scenarios we've had with Vioxx, with torcetrapib, with hormone replacement therapy, with SSRIs in children, etc. In other words, we miss the harm a drug can cause and can grossly overestimate its benefit until high quality data come in. And even if resveritrol can make lab rats live forever, it doesn't matter until large scale trials are done in humans.

Gentleman,

Seriously, some source of consciousness, from protoplasma, from germaplasma or the genes themselves, does seem to run deep, and that this said consciousness, has constructed this multi-cellular unit as organism for very functional reasons. Some of you seem to have some background in general systems theory, I admitt a general lacking in biology and general systems theory, but, if you are to contend that, there is not consciousness behind this contruction of a multicellular body and its maintenance you will have to invest some time here to explain how this comes about. That said, the division of labour so apparent between the soma[body] and that of the germplasma indicates again the presence of a consciousness, at a deeper more elemental level. If you wish to hear someone of science use this term germplasma in a scientific way simply read the following lecture on "Sex And Death", the link is provided below.



find here said lectures

BBC - Radio 4 - Reith Lectures 2001 - The End of Age

:)They are all interesting, however the lecture on, SEX AND DEATH, deals directly with the problem of the soma[body] and the germ-plasma--enjoy![/quote]

In my own case I'm a physician and medical researcher, so I don't look at this from the perspective of systems theory -- and if systems theory regards consciousness as simply chemical / energetic responsiveness to external stimuli, then that is very much different than consciousness from a biological perspective.

From the point of view of plain old biology and medicine, consciousness is a function that is produced by an underlying mechanism, specifically the brain of an animal under conditions of wakefulness. A plant can be said to be aware of moisture in the soil and the direction of sunlight in the sky -- but this is not sensed or appreciated centrally -- so a plant cannot be said to be conscious. Our hair follicles tense up and produce goose bumps when we're cold -- this is an involuntary effect of our efferent central nervous system -- but that does not mean that our hair follicles are conscious of cold -- they're just responding to a biological mechanism. Our consciousness does not pertain to everything in our body -- only the things we're aware of.

How does consciousness come about? Well, digestion is produced by the physiologic functions of the stomach, ambulation is produced by the physiologic functions of the legs, hemofiltration is produced by the physiologic functions of the kidneys, and consciousness is one (of many) physiologic functions produced by the brain. And these physiologic functions inhere in the anatomy, physiology, histology, cell biology, and genetic and epigenetic processes of that organ (as well as all the other afferent neurological and endocrine/paracrine communication mechanisms that make it responsive to other parts of the body).

Aedes,

I thought vitamin C was water soluble??? The worst you could get from 2000 mg of vitamin c is expensive pee.

It is indeed water soluble, you're correct, but that property doesn't make something non-toxic. Water solubility affects many things, including ability to enter cells through diffusion (vs active transport mechanisms), absorption from the gut, distribution through the body, half life, etc. But there are many other factors that determine toxicity, of course.

Vitamin C has 2 negative charges (if I recall correctly), which makes it a very good chelating agent for divalent cations (like Mg2+ and Ca2+). Chronically high doses can leach calcium out of teeth and bones, leading to demineralization of teeth, osteopenia / osteoporosis, and precipitation of the calcium/vitamin C salts in the kidneys causing nephrolithiasis (stones). Excessive doses can also interfere with coagulation factors and lead to bleeding (I'm not sure of the mechanism here).

Interesting information, thanks! So I would suppose that the amount of vitamin C each person could reasonably absorb is relative to that person? I was taught that 2000 mg was the benchmark for a healthy adult male.

I'm not sure of the pharmacokinetics, and I think 2000 mg is the upper limit of what is safe. Toxicity has been seen at 4000 mg daily. To be sure it is quite safe. I'd suggest getting your recommended daily allowance by eating a well rounded diet, rather than taking it as supplements. There are a lot of nutrients that we probably haven't discovered in fruits in addition to the traditional vitamins (just as resveritrol isn't the only beneficial compound in wine).

Actually it makes sense to me. It would explain the new evolution theory that an evolutionary occurrence is indeed very instant. That at some point of meiosis the plasmids have a compiled data source that is registered to an instinct of what should get deleted and what should stay. Eventually something would trigger a deletion. To me, this kind resembles the need for a conscience.

Holiday,

Biology is still a majestic mystery, all kinds of revealations unfolding. You might want to investiagate this, evolutionary biology from somewhat of a different slant, its is called, Shift Theory, if nothing else it gets the wheels turning. Find below the link to it.

Human Evolution: An Alternative Theory

:eek:
Its stuff like that that's just best no to be spread around. I mean, there's a negative to pretty much anything that enters your system, just I'd rather not know it sometimes. :tounge:
I'm not sure the consciousness relies on vitamin C but it would be funny!!