Pinpointing how humans differ from apes
Wednesday, September 23, 1998
By Michael Woods, Post-Gazette Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON -- An international quest to identify a handful of genes responsible for the striking differences in physical appearance and brain power between humans and apes has reached its first milestone.
Researchers say they have discovered what may be the first gene for "humanness." The gene is mutated in humans compared to its counterpart in man's cousins, the Great Apes, the animal family including chimpanzees, orangutans and gorillas that most closely resembles people.
"My group has discovered what is to our knowledge the first major biochemical and genetic difference between humans and great apes," said Dr. Ajit Varki, of the University of California at San Diego. Though admitting the finding is intriguing, he urged restraint in speculating about the implications for determining humanness until further studies are done.
"At the moment, we can only say that this finding has potential implications for understanding differences between humans and apes in communication between cells within the body," he said.
It also may be involved in differences in disease susceptibility between humans and apes, Varki said. Apes tend to be less susceptible to many diseases that affect humans, including influenza and malaria.
Varki and associates Elaine Muchmore and Sandra Diaz plan to publish two formal scientific reports on the discovery in the weeks ahead. Details, however, were buried in a long report on the search for humanness genes that appeared early this month in Science.
The report described a growing effort by researchers to start a Primate Genome Project, an international program to decipher all the genes in man's animal cousins. Primates include apes, monkeys and scores of other mammals that share common physical traits.
It would be a counterpart to the Human Genome Project, which is identifying the entire bounty of genes, termed the genome, that makes up people.
Scientists have recognized since the 1970s that humans and chimpanzees, for instance, differ genetically by the slimmest margin. About 98.5 per cent of the genes in humans and chimps are identical.
The human genome consists of anywhere from 60,000 to 100,000 genes. Thus only 900 to 1,500 genes set humans apart from the rest of the animal kingdom in their ability to speak, write, reason, create complex technology, philosophize, strive to ethical and moral ideals and other distinctly human traits.
An international Primate Genome Program would allow scientists to compare genomes of humans and other animals, revealing the specific genes that make people human. Although the effort is in its infancy, the report predicted that ethical pitfalls lie ahead.
For instance, the knowledge might be used to give chimps human traits, such as a larynx, or voice box, that would provide the missing apparatus for speech.
Varki's pioneering step involved a study of blood and tissue samples from 60 humans from diverse ethnic groups. Scientists compared the samples to those taken from Great Apes. It showed that the outer surfaces of human cells have a different form of one common sugar molecule, termed sialic acid, found in all other primates.
Sialic acid has a number of roles in health and disease. Bacteria and viruses use sialic acid to gain a foothold in infecting cells and causing disease. It also acts as a gateway for chemical messenger molecules that cells use to communicate and coordinate their activities in everyday life. In addition, sialic acid may be important for early brain development.
Varki found that the human sialic acid molecule differs in its lack of a single oxygen atom. The atom is missing at a key point in sialic acid's molecular architecture that could affect how cells communicate and their vulnerability to infections. He believes sialic acid may account for humans being more susceptible to certain diseases than other primates.
What difference does the missing oxygen mean for an animal's health or behavior? Japanese scientists have already begun a study to find out. Using genetic engineering techniques, they are raising a colony of mice with the gene segment intentionally deleted.
"If we evolved here as presented , from a common ape ancester....then one would assume that our closest genetic cousin would be the apes....but they arent...or closest genetic cousins are dogs and pigs..."-- Crim Post 103
---
"Scientists have recognized since the 1970s that humans and chimpanzees, for instance, differ genetically by the slimmest margin. About 98.5 per cent of the genes in humans and chimps are identical."-- Crim Post 124
There is no evidence that any species flora or fauna is exclusively native to this planet.
There is no more evidence any species evolved here than there is for them to have been delivered or engineered here by extraterrestrials (which theoretically, could be occurring unobserved in our midst if there is such an advanced extraterrestrial intelligence).
What do evolutionists think about teaching that life came from outer space??? They already teach the Big Bang theory, which is just another immaculate conception...
To claim life evolved here without influence from the rest of the cosmos is a claim that the earth is the center of the universe; this is akin to saying the sun revolves around the earth and the earth just magically appeared here.
For there to be life on earth consistent with evolutionary theory, there has to be life elsewhere and that life is in the same place of the cosmos the earth is from.
Evolutionists will mock creationists saying they believe in a flying spaghetti monster, but conveniently forget it is evolutionists that believe in a boiling pot of primordial spaghetti sauce... illogical...
(p.s. I am an atheist)