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

Transgenerational Epigenetic Inheritance: the story of learned avoidance

elifesciences.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 101 posts

Re: Transgenerational Epigenetic Inheritance: the story of learned avoidance

#21

Post by phoronixrly »

capitol_ wrote: post #18
shevy-java wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can be simplified to this question: - Do C. elegans offspring show a modified behaviour unrelated to a changed genome sequence? That is a fairly simple question. The answer to it should be simple too. You always have to distill complicated papers that babble about things to a minimum statement.

> That is a fairly simple question. The answer to it should be simple too. "Is P equal to NP" is also a simple question.

The answer should be simple, too -- either yes or no. OP did not imply proving it would be simple.

Re: Transgenerational Epigenetic Inheritance: the story of learned avoidance

#22

Post by morkalork »

mmaunder wrote: post #14

This relates to policy because it addresses the question of whether we carry epigenetic baggage from prior generations. For example, trauma that our parents, or grandparents experienced could lead to behavior modifications and poorer outcomes in us. If that is the case, it has profound public policy implications.

The consequences could be terrible if it were intentionally weaponised by a government looks at the Russian empire.

Re: Transgenerational Epigenetic Inheritance: the story of learned avoidance

#24

Post by Aurornis »

shevy-java wrote: post #10
Aurornis wrote: post #3

> While the Murphy group consistently observed this attraction in their assays, the Hunter group generally did not (Kaletsky et al., 2025). The Vidal-Gadea group also observed that worms that had not been exposed to PA14 were initially attracted to it, suggesting that this is an important piece of the puzzle (Akinosho et al., 2025). Indeed, when tested directly, the Murphy group did not observe attraction using the t…

It can be simplified to this question: - Do C. elegans offspring show a modified behaviour unrelated to a changed genome sequence? That is a fairly simple question. The answer to it should be simple too. You always have to distill complicated papers that babble about things to a minimum statement.

By waving away the hard parts you’re missing why it’s not a simple question in the context of this paper (what I was writing about).

The behavioral test they used showed different results under different circumstances. Even variables like temperature might impact the behavior exhibited in the test.

> You always have to distill complicated papers that babble about things to a minimum statement.

Disagree. You always have to read the papers and understand the details.

Re: Transgenerational Epigenetic Inheritance: the story of learned avoidance

#25

Post by Aurornis »

phoronixrly wrote: post #21
capitol_ wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That is a fairly simple question. The answer to it should be simple too. "Is P equal to NP" is also a simple question.

The answer should be simple, too -- either yes or no. OP did not imply proving it would be simple.

OP did imply that the paper contained the simple answer, though.

It’s easy to say that the truth is simple if you ignore everything about exploring whether or not a paper is an accurate representation of the truth.

Re: Transgenerational Epigenetic Inheritance: the story of learned avoidance

#26

Post by macleginn »

shevy-java wrote: post #8

So Lamarck wasn't entirely incorrect either. Darwin would have been fascinated by these results.

There has been aruably a more serious blow to the pure Darwinian evolution (this is all epigenetics, after all): non-random occurrence of useful mutations in populations exposed to particular diseases.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40854136/

Re: Transgenerational Epigenetic Inheritance: the story of learned avoidance

#28

Post by ch4s3 »

macleginn wrote: post #26
shevy-java wrote: post #8

So Lamarck wasn't entirely incorrect either. Darwin would have been fascinated by these results.

There has been aruably a more serious blow to the pure Darwinian evolution (this is all epigenetics, after all): non-random occurrence of useful mutations in populations exposed to particular diseases. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40854136/

I don’t really see that as anti-Darwinian. Those genes successfully attach themselves to a new organism and provide advantages such that they are selected for in the population.

Re: Transgenerational Epigenetic Inheritance: the story of learned avoidance

#30

Post by throwaway2562 »

mmaunder wrote: post #14

This relates to policy because it addresses the question of whether we carry epigenetic baggage from prior generations. For example, trauma that our parents, or grandparents experienced could lead to behavior modifications and poorer outcomes in us. If that is the case, it has profound public policy implications.

An absurd take. The ‘trauma’ people, baggage handlers de nos jours, have already weaponised the phenomenon for political points, before we even know definitively if it exists. Hey ho.

Incidentally, nobody yet I see has suggested that epigenetics could lead to better outcomes. I wonder why?

Post reply on HN