Sentences with phrase «much about genes»

While a person's genes dictate eye, hair and skin color, earlobes (attached or dangling), the ability to curl your tongue or not, and the shapes and size of fingers and toes, much about our gene's instructions is how we influence them with our environment.

Not exact matches

We don't know much about phallus evolution (external genitalia generally don't mineralize, so the fossil record is of little help), but we can compare the expression of phallus genes from organism to organism.

Researchers still have much to learn about the imprinting process and the genes involved, Zhang says, but the discovery of a second mechanism for silencing one copy of these genes underscores imprinting's importance.

Sure, much of the buzz these days is about patenting genes and enforcing patents on life - saving drugs in developing countries.

This is much larger than the gay gene; it's about all sexual reproduction.»

At the same time, I had a great opportunity to learn much about the molecular aspects of the work, from gene construction to plant transformation and screening.

C. renhardtii had similar genes near but outside its MT. Like so much else, it seems sex cells are all about location, location, location (Science, vol 328, p 351).

After gene - typing about 3,000 people, Sturm found that how OCA2 is expressed — and how much pigment a person has — is strongly linked to three single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), or single letter variations, in a DNA sequence near the OCA2 gene.

Much of other animals» intraspecies violence is about competition for mates and the chance to pass on genes.

The nationally representative survey of more than 4,700 U.S. adults centered on public views about: gene editing that might give babies a lifetime with much reduced risk of serious disease, implantation of brain chips that potentially could give people a much improved ability to concentrate and process information, and transfusions of synthetic blood that might give people much greater speed, strength and stamina.

And when asked about the possibility of gene editing giving babies a much reduced risk of serious disease, some 49 % of adults say this would be less acceptable if it changed the genetic makeup of the whole population.

Genetic tests for mutations in the so - called breast cancer genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2, may not reveal as much about cancer risk as earlier reports have estimated, according to two studies published in tomorrow's New England Journal of Medicine.

It's not only about having the best genes to survive rough conditions, he says, but also how much the male bird can contribute.

There has been much excitement among scientists about the power of these new gene editing methods, and particularly about the CRISPR / Cas9 system, which is relatively simple to use and generally very efficient.

Not much is known about the genes and cellular pathways that trigger GNRH release.

The finding could reveal much about how cells control gene activity, and also illuminate cancer, multiple sclerosis, and other diseases spurred by faulty gene expression.

Biologists are keen to sequence the nematode's genome because much is already known about the creature's molecular genetics and developmental biology — a state of affairs that should help researchers to assign functions to the genes the sequence reveals.

Three years ago, no one knew or cared about much about a protein called Cpf1 produced by a bacterial gene.

If you make random changes to a gene, you'll still be able to get a protein out of the result about a third of the time (though for any specific gene the ratio might be much higher or lower).

In it, they sound the alarm about new genome - editing techniques known as CRISPR and zinc - finger nucleases that make it much easier for scientists to delete, add, or change specific genes.

The senior researchers of the study, Martin Eilers and Juha Klefström are excited about the concept that Myc's ability to turn off rather than turn on genes is a key to cell death: «It is much easier to bring cellular activities down than up with the existing drugs.

But in the brain, the team detected much more gene expression in humans than in chimps, whereas gene expression in the brains of chimps and the other primates was about the same.

Knowing the sequences, however, does not always tell us much about the function of the genes that regulate development and homeostasis.

On Aug. 3, the scientific article in Nature finally gave us some facts about the much - hyped experiments that involved editing the genomes of human embryos at the Center for Embryonic Cell and Gene Therapy at Oregon Health and Science University.

To conserve the gene pool of the black - footed ferret and discern how it may be changing through time, we can ask questions about how much genetic diversity was present in 1985 that may now be lost.

Array CGH provided a much better look at the gene content on the chromosomes of human embryonic stem cells, with a resolution about 100 times better than standard clinical methods.

Yet genes are not our destiny, and there is still much to learn about DNA and how it shapes our lives.

Stats professor Cosma Shalizi explains heritability «says nothing about how much [a trait's level]... is under genetic control» and it's «irrelevant to malleability» (heritable ≠ immutable; genes often aren't carved - in - stone fate).

Methylation prevents excessive gene activity in X-linked genes, however much remains unknown about how this process influences infants» risk of developing airway diseases.

Although experimental mammalian genetics with the use of ES cells and the techniques pioneered by my co-awardees is now well founded and used, there is still much to be learned and much interesting research in store about what genes really do in the context of the real biology of the whole organism in a complex environment.

Is there any research you've come across about the defective BRCA gene, its relationship to IGF - 1 growth, and how much a plant based diet reduces the risk for those who have this mutation?

And for a vegan bodybuilder who must unfortunatelly play tetris with the food sources that he choses in order to give to his body the right ammounts of aminos, restricting SPI and soy foods so much does not make his goal any easier.There are sometimes that you need a meal thats complete with aminos and soy provides that meal with the additional benefits of lacking the saturated fats trans cholesterol and other endothelium inflammatory factors.I'm not saying that someone should go all the way to 200gr of SPI everyday or consuming a kilo of soy everyday but some servings of soy now and then even every day or the use of SPI which helps in positive nitrogen balance does not put you in the cancer risk team, thats just OVERexaggeration.Exercise, exposure to sunlight, vegan diet or for those who can not something as close to vegan diet, fruits and vegetables which contains lots of antioxidants and phtochemicals, NO STRESS which is the global killer, healthy social relationships, keeping your cortisol and adrenaline levels down (except the necessary times), good sleep and melatonin function, clean air, no radiation, away from procceced foods and additives like msg etc and many more that i can not even remember is the key to longevity.As long as your immune system is functioning well and your natural killer cells TP53 gene and many other cancer inhibitors are good and well, no cancer will ever show his face to you.With that logic we shouldn't eat ANY ammount of protein and we should go straight to be breatharians living only with little water and sunlight exposure cause you like it or not the raise of IGF1 is inevitable i know that raise the IGF1 sky high MAYBE is not the best thing but we are not talking about external hormones and things like this.Stabby raccoon also has a point.And even if you still worry about the consumption of soy... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21711174.

Order Dr. Sara's new book - about this topic and so much more — entitled, Younger: A Breakthrough Program to Reset Your Genes, Reverse Aging, and Turn Back the Clock 10 Years.

Order Dr. Sara's new book — about this topic and so much more — entitled, Younger: A Breakthrough Program to Reset Your Genes, Reverse Aging, and Turn Back the Clock 10 Years.

BTW some of you stated you eat 2500 to 4000 a day (like it's a small ammount)-- this is WAY TOO MUCH if you want to slim down or even maintain... I agree with your points here tho, and I'm very pleased someone is blunt about these things because most people should hear it, but don't want to listen, because why blame yourself for your shortcomings if you can blame your imaginary «bad genes»?

During the past five years of research, Dr. Sara discovered crucial truths locked in our genes — truths about how you age, how you gain weight, how your body handles stress, and so much more.

I wish they'd just go through and basically say okay, well here, Taubes says what about the genetics of obesity as that out of the genes involved with obesity determining how much we eat and exercise.

To be fair, though, Gene didn't seem like much of a wiz in the kitchen, and spent most of his time on the job reminiscing about imaginary foes that all tied into his shell - shocked pile of wet mud he called a brain.

Leaving aside the fact that none of these folks look like they belong in the same gene pool (and The Wire has a funny article about how only one of the actors in the film is actually Jewish), the premise has promise, since forcing the members of a dysfunctional family (and there is much «dys» here) to spend time in a small space could lead to some funny results.

Much of our understanding about the human genome, genes, and inheritance is changing.

Gene [Fama] doesn't like to talk about that much, but it's crucial from a policy point of view.

Extreme longevity is much more about luck than it is about genes, or environment, or ovaries.»

There's not much that you can do about your pet's inherited genes.

The person who worried about the «38 — 57 % of those dogs evaluated early where they predict CHD will develop, but doesn't...» isn't adding «at two years of age», and again ignores the much worse situation where at least an equally high percentage of OFA - normal dogs might develop late - onset DJD and / or pass on many bad genes to offspring.

Mixing genes between species seemed to be about as unnatural as you can get — here was humankind acquiring too much technological power; something was bound to go horribly wrong.

But... on an [another] level... we could overcome our selfish genes and try to care a little bit about a future we ourselves will never see, although probably does not make much sense to people like Bjorn Lomberg, the eloquent statistician from Denmark.

Correlations, of course, do not imply causation and standard statistical techniques, such as the ones used here, are unable to provide much information about the causal processes that might lead from the gene × gene interaction to conduct disorder or to adult antisocial behavior.

I also found the discussion about how much of personality and temperment were influenced by our genes and how much by our environment.

Now, I know Seinfeld wrote nine whole series of his show about nothing, but it included great lines like «Boy, a little too much chlorine in that gene pool.»