Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Fugate family of Kentucky has had blue skin for centuries (2017)

allthatsinteresting.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 91 posts

Re: The Fugate family of Kentucky has had blue skin for centuries (2017)

#51

Post by diggan »

silisili wrote: post #34
prvc wrote: post #18

>Though today Benjy and most of the Fugate family descendants have lost their blue coloring, the tint still comes out in their skin when they are cold or flush with anger. I wish they had included at least one photograph of this.

I went to college in Kentucky with two of the Fugates, twins in fact. Sorry to report, neither were blue in color.

Makes sense, seems like in the 1960s they came up with a solution for removing the blue color, so most likely if they have the recessive gene, they are taking those pills.

> Using research collected from studies of isolated Alaskan Eskimo populations, Cawein was able to conclude that the Fugates carried a rare hereditary blood disorder that causes excessive levels of methemoglobin in their blood.

> Cawein devised a cure for this disorder: more blue. Counterintuitively, the best chemical for activating the body’s process of turning methemoglobin to hemoglobin is methylene blue dye. The Fugates he treated ingested this dye and within a few minutes, the blue coloration of their skin disappeared, and their skin turned pink.

> As long as they kept ingesting pills of the substance regularly, these blue people of Kentucky could live their lives normally.

Re: The Fugate family of Kentucky has had blue skin for centuries (2017)

#52

Post by redis_mlc »

cperciva wrote: post #17
boomboomsubban wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other than the one person marrying their aunt, the closest connection I can see is a second cousin marrying, something I believe is legal, healthy, and very common in that period. I'd bet portions of your family tree from two hundred years ago would look similar.

Mine certainly does. One quarter of my ancestry comes from an area of Lancashire which had three wealthy families -- the Cleggs, the Mercers, and the Taylors. Those three families intermarried almost exclusively from ca. 1400 until ca. 1850.

There still is a lot of cousin marriage today, mostly in religious pockets that are either small for the region, or shrinking rapidly (look at Lebanon or Middle Eastern countries.)

In Islam, since the Prophet wanted to marry his close relatives, their kinship rules have a couple of weird cutout exceptions compared to most uniform rules in other religions.

Re: The Fugate family of Kentucky has had blue skin for centuries (2017)

#53

Post by boomboomsubban »

dr_dshiv wrote: post #50
ocimbote wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the sake of clarity: I will not stand on the side of homeopathy, ever. It's placebo effect marketing rather than evidence-based science and hence not worth my money.

What about when placebo-based medicine offers better patient outcomes, for certain disorders? E.g., for sleep medicine without side effects? We used homeopathy for my daughters car sickness and it worked great.

Did you know stretching before a car trip prevents all but the worst car sickness? Both my chiropractor and my acupuncturist recommended it and I haven't suffered from car sickness since.

There, I saved you the cost of the water pills. You don't need costly, potentially dangerous additive laced medicine if you're just looking for the placebo effect.

Re: The Fugate family of Kentucky has had blue skin for centuries (2017)

#54

Post by ocimbote »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #47
ocimbote wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the sake of clarity: I will not stand on the side of homeopathy, ever. It's placebo effect marketing rather than evidence-based science and hence not worth my money.

I didn't think you did, but valid things can share traits with bullshit and still be valid things.

This is correct and too often ignored. Bullshit owns nothing:)

Re: The Fugate family of Kentucky has had blue skin for centuries (2017)

#55

Post by jacksonkmarley »

prvc wrote: post #18

>Though today Benjy and most of the Fugate family descendants have lost their blue coloring, the tint still comes out in their skin when they are cold or flush with anger. I wish they had included at least one photograph of this.

Same. In fact the obvious question in the absence of photographs is how blue they really were.

Re: The Fugate family of Kentucky has had blue skin for centuries (2017)

#57

Post by londons_explore »

sandworm101 wrote: post #36

This article touches on something that remains very true today: if you want to study genetic disorders you look at closely-related populations. If the condition you want to study is linked to a recessive gene, you want to find (or create) an isolated population with that gene. In animals/plants this is why inbreeding can serve a useful function. If you want to detect a recessive gene, but either don't have access to…

> inbreeding can serve a useful function

Are there any examples of species doing this 'deliberately'?

Re: The Fugate family of Kentucky has had blue skin for centuries (2017)

#58

Post by sam345 »

prvc wrote: post #18

>Though today Benjy and most of the Fugate family descendants have lost their blue coloring, the tint still comes out in their skin when they are cold or flush with anger. I wish they had included at least one photograph of this.

https://allthatsinteresting.com/fugate-family-blue-people-of...

Re: The Fugate family of Kentucky has had blue skin for centuries (2017)

#59

Post by dr_dshiv »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #53
dr_dshiv wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about when placebo-based medicine offers better patient outcomes, for certain disorders? E.g., for sleep medicine without side effects? We used homeopathy for my daughters car sickness and it worked great.

Did you know stretching before a car trip prevents all but the worst car sickness? Both my chiropractor and my acupuncturist recommended it and I haven't suffered from car sickness since. There, I saved you the cost of the water pills. You don't need costly, potentially dangerous additive laced medicine if you're just looking for the placebo effect.

Yeah, but she feels sick in the car. Then we give her a pill. There is nothing dangerous in homeopathy, that’s the dilution effect.

Another thread trending on the value of placebo: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28887705

Re: The Fugate family of Kentucky has had blue skin for centuries (2017)

#60

Post by ocimbote »

dr_dshiv wrote: post #50
ocimbote wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the sake of clarity: I will not stand on the side of homeopathy, ever. It's placebo effect marketing rather than evidence-based science and hence not worth my money.

What about when placebo-based medicine offers better patient outcomes, for certain disorders? E.g., for sleep medicine without side effects? We used homeopathy for my daughters car sickness and it worked great.

Placebo is very powerful and is actually validated by scientific research.

So when the conditions are here, as they seemingly were for your daughters, it's great.

Yet, homeopathy, when considered as a potent product, didn't help, because it is not potent. The conditions enabling the placebo effect did. And no one would complain about that :)

The problem arises when homeopathy is sold and marketed as potent _per se_.

Post reply on HN