Tag: Genetics

Dog DNA Determines Guilt

On By robstroudIn Animals, C.S. Lewis, Christian Life, History, Humor, Modern Life, Nature, Poetry, The Future9 Comments

It is surprising how inexpensive and accessible DNA testing has become. Many readers of Mere Inkling have submitted samples ourselves. But how many of us have had our pets tested?

The science of genetics is quite recent. Gregor Mendel (1822-1884) is considered the father of such studies. As Britannica describes the history, “The word genetics was introduced in 1905 by English biologist William Bateson, who was one of the discoverers of Mendel’s work and who became a champion of Mendel’s principles of inheritance.”

Molecular genetics did not begin in earnest until 1941 . . . A major landmark was attained in 1953 when American geneticist and biophysicist James D. Watson and British biophysicists Francis Crick and Maurice Wilkins devised a double helix model for DNA structure.

The Human Genome Project didn’t begin until 1990, and didn’t reach its goal until the new millennia. The astute reader will recognize that C.S. Lewis lived before these genetic studies reached their current status, so we should not expect comment from him on DNA per se. Nevertheless, as Francis Sellers Collins, director of the Human Genome Project (2009-2018), says his work is quite compatible with C.S. Lewis’ writings.

In fact, in a lecture at Cambridge, he described how Mere Christianity was pivotal in his conversion from agnosticism to Christianity. According to this preeminent geneticist, “even in the first few pages, all my arguments about faith just fell apart. It was breathtaking . . . Lewis remains my best teacher.”

There is some question as to whether the DNA testing market has peaked. Unsurprising, since it isn’t like tobacco, coffee or rich desserts that “addict” customers to generate repeated purchases. As Advisory Board says, “given one’s genetic data is unlikely to change, most consumers may not see a reason to purchase another DNA testing kit.”

So, how might these corporations remain profitable? Why, by expanding their offerings to the animal kingdom. One such company called Embark claims to offer the “most accurate dog DNA test available.” 

Some people purchase the service to satisfy their curiosity about a pet’s breed (often a blend of several). A more valuable benefit is gaining insights into their health and traits. The oddest aspect of the process appears to be Embark’s boast that they offer “the world’s first canine relative finder.”

Like many of us, C.S. Lewis loved dogs. He didn’t, however, go so far as to worship them. I suspect that C.S. Lewis would opt out of the chance to DNA-define his pets. Best to just love them and savor their companionship.

In his essay “The Personal Heresy,” C.S. Lewis proposes an interesting argument about expressing love only to those capable of receiving it.

There is a reaction at present going on against the excessive love of pet animals. We have been taught to despise the rich, barren woman who loves her lap dog too much and her neighbor too little. It may be that when once the true impulse is inhibited, a dead poet is a nobler substitute than a live Peke, but this is by no means obvious.

You can do something for the Peke, and it can make some response to you. It is at least sentient; but most poetolaters hold that a dead man has no consciousness, and few indeed suppose that he has any which we are likely to modify.*

DNA service businesses are probably licking their lips at the prospects offered by a new market. The French are blazing a new trail for the rest of us. According to Euronews, Béziers will require pet owners to “carry a ‘genetic passport’ for their dog.”

The reason is simple. Too many dog walkers are failing to perform their civic (and humane) duty of cleaning up after their pets. 

Dog excrement found on the streets would be collected and tested then sent to the police. They would match the DNA to national pet registers, locate the owner and charge them up to €122 for cleaning up the streets.

Apparently, similar efforts have been attempted in Valencia, Tel Aviv and portions of London.

It sounds like a rather extreme way to address what superficially appears to be a simple problem. But, sadly, in many places, public sanitation has declined to unbelievable depths. In San Francisco, for example, the once picturesque metropolis has voluntarily surrendered many areas to criminals and addicts who feel no compunction about defecating in public. While I can’t speak for European, Asian, African or Latin American countries, in the U.S. a similar story of decay is repeated in many urban centers.

San Franciscans can’t be criticized for not throwing money at the problem. Nevertheless, when progressive Slate magazine reported last year on the city’s newest public toilet, they said “cities shouldn’t need $1.7 million and years of design review to build a municipal toilet.” 

Not that San Francisco treats such facilities with care. One space age toilet lasted only a few days before malfunctioning. But it was expensive, stainless steel, and bore the upgraded title of “kiosk.”

A highly hyped new SF bathroom hailed as “the future of public toilets” lasted only three days into said future, as the high-tech bathroom kiosk quickly had to be relieved of its duty and found itself closed for repairs.

Since these are manufactured by a Paris-based company, perhaps they can design a canine kiosk to solve the Béziers dilemma? After all, the cost might well be equivalent to the sum of all of the DNA tests the citizens are being forced to cover. 

A Final Thought about Animal DNA

Many of us, like C.S. Lewis, are pet lovers. And many also care about the suffering of other animals, domesticated and wild. There may come a day when DNA testing offers ways to enhance the lives of these other creations of God.

However, it does seem frivolous, does it not, to apply such advanced (and not inexpensive) processes for the purpose of tracking down derelict dog walkers? Or, in other judicatories, which have not yet embraced that level of surveillance, simply to attempt to track down doggie-relatives?

As to the matter of checking pet DNA for genetic abnormalities, “Should you get your pet’s DNA tested? Scientists urge caution” counsels careful consideration.

In the interview, Elinor Karlsson, director of vertebrate genomics at the Broad Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts says,

With genetic tests for humans, there have been so many studies that look at whether or not a certain mutation in your genes actually leads to you developing a certain disease. There just isn’t this massive body of work on dog genomes. So many of these tests are telling owners that their dog could get a certain disease without any major studies on how likely that is to happen. The science needs to catch up.

In response to the question “what are the dangers of potentially inaccurate test results?” Lisa Moses, a veterinarian affiliated with Harvard Medical School in Boston advises,

In my veterinary practice, I’ve seen more and more people coming in with results that show their dog has a chance of developing conditions like epilepsy, heart disease, and degenerative muscular disorders, and they want to make treatment decisions right away.

They’re ready to pay for more tests or medical interventions that the dog might not actually need, that could be quite expensive, and that could be invasive for the dog. In some cases, people preemptively end their dog’s life if they think their dog is predisposed to a degenerative disease, because don’t they want their pet to suffer.

So once again we see that, as they often do, silly scenarios can lead to serious subjects.

* The passage from “The Personal Heresy” continues: 

Unless you hold beliefs which enable you to obey the colophons of the old books by praying for the authors’ souls, there is nothing that you can do for a dead poet: and certainly he will do nothing for you. He did all he could for you while he lived: nothing more will ever come.

 I do not say that a personal emotion towards the author will not sometimes arise spontaneously while we read; but if it does we should let it pass swiftly over the mind like a ripple that leaves no trace. If we retain it we are cosseting with substitutes an emotion whose true object is our neighbour. Hence it is not surprising that those who most amuse themselves with personality after this ghostly fashion often show little respect for it in their parents, their servants, or their wives. 

C.S. Lewis on Stupidity

On By robstroudIn C.S. Lewis, Christian Life, Modern Life, Nature, Potentially Useful Trivia9 Comments

Just because someone did something extraordinarily stupid does not mean that another fool should repeat the act. And C.S. Lewis would agree.

This summer a (likely unemployed) Coloradan decided to push a peanut to the top of Pikes Peak – a 14,115 foot American landmark – using his nose. Talk about stupid. His ambition was to be the first person in the twenty-first century to accomplish this pseudo-impressive goal.

That’s right, “in the twenty-first century.” Oddly, he is the fourth man (women are too intelligent, IMHO) to waste time in this pursuit, but the others proved their mettle in the twentieth century.

Simple stupidity is not the oddest motivator of irrational actions. Some people feel compelled to pursue death-defying activities. Those of us who would prefer to avoid danger whenever possible, are confused by others who embrace it.

Quite recently, “the body of an American mountaineer whose daring achievements brought her acclaim among some of the world’s most elite climbers was found . . . on a peak in Nepal.” Apparently, she climbed the “world’s eighth-highest peak” so she could ski down from its peak.

Hilaree Nelson, 49, and her romantic and climbing partner, Jim Morrison, were trying to ski down Manaslu . . . An avalanche apparently blew her off a cliff onto the south face of the mountain, opposite of their intended route of descent.

Tragic, most would agree. Foolish, many would add.

Doing something silly falls lower on the FDS (foolishness disorder spectrum) than does taking arbitrary and utterly unnecessary risks.

C.S. Lewis offers some interesting counsel to a woman who shared concern about the marital frustrations of someone close to her. (Yes, people actively sought his advice.) He ranks ignorance very low on the scale of relationship problems.

It is a great joy to be able to ‘feel’ God’s love as a reality, and one must give thanks for it and use it. But you must be prepared for the feeling dying away again, for feelings are by nature impermanent.

The great thing is to continue to believe when the feeling is absent: & these periods do quite as much for one as those when the feeling is present. It sounds to me as if Genia had a pretty good husband on the whole.

So much matrimonial misery comes to me in my mail that I feel those whose partner has no worse fault than being stupider than themselves may be said to have drawn a prize! It hardly amounts to a Problem. (Correspondence, 1953).

So it is, that while obviously undesirable, stupidity is not a bad thing in itself. In “The World’s Last Night,” Lewis includes the trait in a curious list. And the passage suggests to me the dangers implicit in allowing one‘s ignorance to jeopardize their wellbeing.

Perfect love, we know, casteth out fear. But so do several other things – ignorance, alcohol, passion, presumption, and stupidity.

It is very desirable that we should all advance to that perfection of love in which we shall fear no longer; but it is very undesirable, until we have reached that stage, that we should allow any inferior agent to cast out our fear.

It is precisely when what I would identify as stupidity inspires dangerous activities, that C.S. Lewis would rule it to be detrimental. And this brings us to the question of why some few people do what the majority of us “saner” people would avoid.

Why Do People Pursue Risky Activities

For our discussion here, I am not including people who face danger due to their vocations. Doubtless some “first responders” and military members relish brushes with death, but they are in the minority. Most are not eager to court death.

It has been debated as to why some people are drawn to the most hazardous of so-called “extreme sports.” The uncharitable might attribute a vulnerability to the siren call of danger to mere stupidity, but there are other factors at work.

However, some people are conditioned by their upbringing to participate in unsafe behaviors (e.g. base jumping, smoking or alligator wrestling). And, in recent years, we have been hearing more about genetic dispositions to such activities. It appears there is some merit to the notion of there being a “risk taking gene.”

A major 2019 study reported in in Nature Genetics “identified . . . 99 [genetic] loci associated with general risk tolerance.” An accessible discussion of the study says, “the genetic variants identified in the study open a new avenue of research on the biological mechanisms that influence a person’s willingness to take risks.”

In any case, DNA is only one, limited factor. Researchers confirmed “non-genetic factors matter more for risk tolerance than genetic factors. The study shows evidence of shared genetic influences across both an overall measure of risk tolerance and many specific risky behaviors.”

Lacking the fear gene is not quite the same thing as being courageous. As noted above, a person may face danger because of a valid reason. Thus “first responders” and most military members I served as a chaplain were not foolhardy. They didn’t take unnecessary risks. But most were willing to place themselves between very real threats and those they were protecting.

If you personally are of an adventurous nature, I encourage you to take sensible precautions. Avoiding rafting on Class VI rapids and cave diving – anywhere – would be a good place to start..

And for the less daring among us, perhaps we can avoid foolish pursuits that are merely a waste of time. It seems apparent to me that time spent serving others in a food bank, or mowing the lawn of a disabled neighbor, constitute a far better use of our time.

A Dire Norwegian Crime

On By robstroudIn C.S. Lewis, Family, Modern Life, Nature, Reading2 Comments

pulpitrockActually, the title may be slightly misleading, since we don’t know the nationality of the people who risked their child’s life over a 2,000 foot cliff . . . but the scene of their crime was one of Norway’s amazing natural wonders.

Preikestolen, is known in English as Pulpit Rock. It is a rare geological feature, a pillar of rock thrusting 1,982 feet from the ground, with three sides a sheer drop to the rocks. It stands majestic, adjacent to a picturesque fjord.

It’s lovely to behold. But only a fool would want to walk out on it, right?

I mean, just look at it. Doesn’t anyone else notice the huge fissure that splits the pulpit right in half? As I look at it, I can just imagine it splitting down the middle with the exposed side crashing down like an enormously oversized and exponentially elongated domino . . . but a domino made out of granite exposed for eons to the frigid Nordic winters so when it strikes the earth it will shatter into a million and a half fragments like a sheet of ice. Well, that’s what I see when I look at the pictures.

What I don’t see is a tourist site where I would like to prance out and pose for a photo beside the edge, or pretend to have accidentally fallen off the side.

Nope, not by a long shot.

As one visitor said, “It’s a straight drop. You don’t want to go too close because it’s pretty scary. You’d be pretty much dead if you fall down there.”

Yes, “pretty much.’

Nevertheless, scores of thousands of people every year prove how few cautionary genes they and I share by doing just that. Of course, I do share with C.S. Lewis the conviction that courage is utterly necessary for living a Christian life in an anti-Christian world. Even Screwtape understands that!

Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point, which means, at the point of highest reality. A chastity or honesty or mercy which yields to danger will be chaste or honest or merciful only on conditions. Pilate was merciful till it became risky. (The Screwtape Letters).

But this sort of courage does not necessarily translate into foolhardy risking of one’s fragile body.

Back to Scandinavia

Apparently, Preikestolen is quite a popular spot.

I offer links below to a several videos of crazy stunts people have pulled on the small bluff. Some people apparently also like to go there for picnics. That reminded me of a column I posted about “Rational Fears” related to another frightening dining experience.

Tragically, in 2013 a tourist fell from the precipice while shooting photos. But here is the amazing part of that story: “Local sheriff Odd-Bjørn Næss said it was the first time anyone had accidentally fallen over the edge of Preikestolen.”

Up until I read the sheriff’s statement I had always taken pride in my 50% Norse lineage. One reason was because I considered my ancestors sturdy and honest folk. Yes, I see the sheriff’s “accidentally” disclaimer, and I suspect they do experience a number of suicides . . . but I believe that with all of the foolish behavior transpiring at Preikestolen there must be more fatal accidents . . .

The Crime With Which We Began

Accidents, of course, are not crimes. But this, most certainly is. Some adults, presumably the baby’s parents, put their small child at terrible risk by posing her or him beside the edge of the cliff simply to take some shocking photographs.

Yes, you read that right.

They set their little child, who was crawling at the time, on the brink of a 2,000 foot drop!

cliffchildIf you’re familiar with precious little ones, you know that babies do not always crawl in a straight line. Nor do they always continue moving in the direction you plan for them. Not only that, but they are prone to taking occasional tumbles–perhaps even rolling over onto their side or back. And on this rugged pillar top, mind you, the baby was on an extremely uneven, and possibly slippery, surface.

Simply put, these parents are criminals. In every civilized country I’m aware of, “child endangerment” is a crime. You can read the story about their foolhardy action here, and see the frightening photo from which this small image is cropped. (You can see the original picture and the the accompanying article here.)

Unfortunately, they pixilated the adults’ faces, so they can’t be recognized. Seems to me that they should have allowed them to be identified . . . if not for trial, for public shaming so they would be forced to reflect on the responsibilities one assumes as a parent.

Epilogue

trolltonguePreikestolen is not the only deadly sightseeing destination in Norway. Another goes by the more foreboding name of Trolltunga, Troll’s Tongue. It too has claimed at least one life, and from the photo of the small spit of rock, I can’t imagine why anyone would want to walk out on it.

 

As promised:

A Base Jumper Who Nearly Dies

Free Hanging Off of the Cliff

Insane Italians Slack Lining

There are more examples of the craziness evoked by the image of Preikestolen, but these are representative. I thank God I don’t feel the slightest envy as I watch people base jumping, free hanging, or slack lining.

I’m content to get my adrenaline rushes from reading a great book.