Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Discussions on topics related to biochemistry and molecular biology, functional genomics, etc.

Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby hyksos on January 23rd, 2017, 3:02 am 

http://www.genes2cognition.org/about/


Genes to Cognition (G2C) is a neuroscience research programme with the dual aim of discovering fundamental biological principles and important insights into brain disease.

G2C uses genome information as part of a general strategy for understanding cognition at the molecular, cellular and systems neuroscience levels. We use a multi-disciplinary approach to psychiatric diseases including learning impairment, cognitive decline with ageing, dementias, schizophrenia and related psychoses, and brain injury.
User avatar
hyksos
Member
 
Posts: 954
Joined: 28 Nov 2014


Re: Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby BioWizard on June 24th, 2017, 8:32 pm 

Not to sound like a prick, but genomics consistently overpromises and underdelivers. The relationships between DNA and biology are nonlinear and most attempts to derive linear relationships have failed and will continue to fail. People have been trying to recreate in humans the relative success of functional genomics in yeast (a significantly simpler organism) for the past 50 years or so, still without much success. Not to mention that the yeast studies were specifically looking at drug resistance, which is genetically a lot simpler than trying to understand complex native biology.

http://www.nature.com/news/new-concerns ... es-1.22152

This will soon enough be "found" to be the way of RNA/gene expression analyses as well.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12507
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby zetreque on June 24th, 2017, 9:44 pm 

BioWizard » Sat Jun 24, 2017 4:32 pm wrote:Not to sound like a prick, but genomics consistently overpromises and underdelivers. The relationships between DNA and biology are nonlinear and most attempts to derive linear relationships have failed and will continue to fail. People have been trying to recreate in humans the relative success of functional genomics in yeast (a significantly simpler organism) for the past 50 years or so, still without much success. Not to mention that the yeast studies were specifically looking at drug resistance, which is genetically a lot simpler than trying to understand complex native biology.

http://www.nature.com/news/new-concerns ... es-1.22152

This will soon enough be "found" to be the way of RNA/gene expression analyses as well.


The real question then is where do you think the line should be drawn for money going into that field? A lot of research leads to unexpected results, and new technologies. Is it not worth it and money should be put elsewhere?
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2810
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (6)


Re: Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby BioWizard on June 24th, 2017, 10:22 pm 

Great question Zet. I do believe way too much money has been wasted on genomics, and now the AI fad which promises to overcome the shortcomings of genomics. I really don't think it will in current form. What is missing here isn't better model fitting or computational power. What is missing is the models themselves. The rigorous understanding of how exactly the different genes products behave and interact in time and space to give rise to biological processes, most of which are still very poorly understood. I personally would divert most of that money to either understand those things, or otherwise to get at the answers using a more empirical approach (that is one that doesn't require us to full understand all the steps of how DNA code leads to biology). For example, most genomics based personalized medicine platforms are utter horseshit. Being able to correctly assign a treatment to a patient based on a mutation is the exception not the rule (and mostly applies to the rare cases of heritable diseases with an extremely clear culprit mutation/gene). Sequencing the genome of cancer patients, for example, hasn't demonstrably helped anyone and that's a fact, despite all the hype and investor desparation around it. Developing diagnostic tools that directly interrogate the biology of the patient/tumor perform much better, and directing the R&D dollars there is likely to have a much bigger clinical impact in the foreseeable future.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12507
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby Biosapien on June 24th, 2017, 10:43 pm 

I really don't understand why people are keep trying to do complex things in the name of research rather than understanding the basic truth. We all know that the natural resource on our planet is getting much smaller and smaller these days and its primarily due to one simple reason "population explosion". I wonder how the world will be a better place by reducing the mortality rate.
Biosapien
Member
 
Posts: 113
Joined: 11 Mar 2015
zetreque liked this post


Re: Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby BioWizard on June 24th, 2017, 10:47 pm 

Zet, and let's not forget that biology isn't likely to be completely reducible to the DNA code in any case - no matter how much we end up learning about it. That would be like saying that the content of every single excel file that your computer generates could have been predicted by looking at the source code of all the software that is installed on it. Clearly, that's a stupid statement. The source code contains the general instructions, but the interaction between those instructions and the environment/circumstance (in this case the computer user) is what dictates the properties of the final product. For some reason this simple concept seems to evade the genome sequencers and their simplistic logic.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12507
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby BioWizard on June 24th, 2017, 10:49 pm 

Biosapien » 24 Jun 2017 09:43 pm wrote:I really don't understand why people are keep trying to do complex things in the name of research rather than understanding the basic truth. We all know that the natural resource on our planet is getting much smaller and smaller these days and its primarily due to one simple reason "population explosion". I wonder how the world will be a better place by reducing the mortality rate.


Totally irrelevant but yeah ok I get what you're saying. Though solving the planet's problem and pursuing deeper understanding should not be framed as being mutually exclusive or in any way conflicting. Because they aren't.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12507
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby zetreque on June 24th, 2017, 10:50 pm 

Well I know that the gut bacteria biome has opened a lot of people's eyes. They have only scratched the surface of their understanding of that.
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2810
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (6)


Re: Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby BioWizard on June 24th, 2017, 10:59 pm 

Well yes there's that too. But now I see proposals for as much as fixing my iphone through my microbiome *rolls eyes*

There's just way too much hype in biomedical science right now, due to all the VC money slushing around. It's unfortunate in some ways, but possibly fortunate in others. You just need to keep your BS filter active and on shape.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12507
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby Forest_Dump on June 24th, 2017, 11:40 pm 

I have to admit that I don't pay as much attention as I used to to the hyperbola around these fund raising corporate things. Its been too long I suppose since the last major disease sure. (Anyone remember what the last major cure was?) So I avoid all of the disease charities, etc., because, while they may be making some modest gains here and there, I get the feeling that real cures just aren't in the books. So I don't expect that the genomics front is going to cure all of ours ills any more than we have been able to cure the common cold. But there are still some possibilities for great gains in some areas. We have certainly learned lots from genetic studies from an evolutionary perspective although, as Bio and others have noted, these kinds of gains have needed some outside calibrating to give it some perspective. I would say ignore most of the ype and put the money where there are solid gains on some level or another and constantly monitor, etc., so that when the gains start to slow down, start putting the money into other thngs that will give more bang for the buck. I think a problem we have is that we tend to put too much money into kinds of research that were productive a few decades ago but have become white elephants now.
User avatar
Forest_Dump
Resident Member
 
Posts: 8706
Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Location: Great Lakes Region


Re: Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby Biosapien on June 25th, 2017, 12:08 am 

Totally irrelevant but yeah ok I get what you're saying. Though solving the planet's problem and pursuing deeper understanding should not be framed as being mutually exclusive or in any way conflicting. Because they aren't.



Sorry for not explaining things in view of genetics. My opinion is searching things on the DNA may help people to find answer but it cannot do anything beyond that cause we still lack profound knowledge on gene gene interaction and so on. Diabetics is one of the best example of genetic research with no cure so far.
Biosapien
Member
 
Posts: 113
Joined: 11 Mar 2015


Re: Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby zetreque on June 25th, 2017, 1:12 am 

Biosapien » Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:08 pm wrote:
Totally irrelevant but yeah ok I get what you're saying. Though solving the planet's problem and pursuing deeper understanding should not be framed as being mutually exclusive or in any way conflicting. Because they aren't.



Sorry for not explaining things in view of genetics. My opinion is searching things on the DNA may help people to find answer but it cannot do anything beyond that cause we still lack profound knowledge on gene gene interaction and so on. Diabetics is one of the best example of genetic research with no cure so far.


how about if your genetics say you are decedent from Native Americans or Central and South Americans, you are more likely to be obese on a sugary diet. Can anyone find anything to disprove that? Of course we have to rule out income factors.
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2810
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (6)


Re: Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby Biosapien on June 25th, 2017, 1:32 am 

zetreque » June 25th, 2017, 11:42 am wrote:
Biosapien » Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:08 pm wrote:
how about if your genetics say you are decedent from Native Americans or Central and South Americans, you are more likely to be obese on a sugary diet. Can anyone find anything to disprove that? Of course we have to rule out income factors.


Ya they gonna spend another few million dollar to confirm the ancestral tree and say its all due to genetics and there is no cure for it, because its on my genes.
Biosapien
Member
 
Posts: 113
Joined: 11 Mar 2015


Re: Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby zetreque on June 25th, 2017, 1:38 am 

Biosapien » Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:32 pm wrote:
Ya they gonna spend another few million dollar to confirm the ancestral tree and say its all due to genetics and there is no cure for it, because its on my genes.


Millions of dollars just to tell people not to eat as much sugar as they do. Makes sense to me. lol
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2810
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (6)


Re: Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby Biosapien on June 26th, 2017, 11:56 pm 

zetreque » June 25th, 2017, 12:08 pm wrote:[quote="[url=http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=323796#p323796]


Millions of dollars just to tell people not to eat as much sugar as they do. Makes sense to me. lol[/quote]


"That's what happening in reality". About ancestral tree i think even if its true, diagnostic people are the one who gonna benefit a lot in the name of geneome sequence to confirm my DNA sequence. So ultimately the person who have diabetus also develope blood pressure after getting the bill for DNA sequence.
Biosapien
Member
 
Posts: 113
Joined: 11 Mar 2015


Re: Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby BioWizard on June 27th, 2017, 6:39 pm 

Here's another one for you zet:

https://amp-medpagetoday-com.cdn.amppro ... rief/66263

"The authors reported that there was "no evidence that whole genome sequencing enhanced or detracted from preventive care" or that it had either a negative or beneficial effect on health, anxiety, or depression scores."

Is there a place for whole genome sequencing in primary care? Short answer: No.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12507
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby wolfhnd on June 27th, 2017, 7:16 pm 

BioWizard » Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:39 pm wrote:Is there a place for whole genome sequencing in primary care? Short answer: No.


How about for disease causing organisms to trace infectious diseases?
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4182
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Genes to Cognition at Edinburgh

Postby BioWizard on June 27th, 2017, 9:30 pm 

wolfhnd » 27 Jun 2017 06:16 pm wrote:
BioWizard » Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:39 pm wrote:Is there a place for whole genome sequencing in primary care? Short answer: No.


How about for disease causing organisms to trace infectious diseases?


So like PCR detection? That's kind of a different application.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12507
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)



Return to Biochemistry

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests