Posted on 06/20/2013 5:29:54 PM PDT by Maelstorm
This bit of science arcanum is especially cringe-worthy. Many years ago, scientists first discovered that a large minority of women have Y-chromosome gene sequences in their blood. At first glance, this seems strange. Men are born with Y-chromosomes but most women are not. The male cells in these women must’ve come from somewhere else.
But where?
The most obvious source is a fetus. Nearly every woman who has ever been pregnant or had a baby has cells from her fetus circulating in her bloodstream. These cells filter through the placenta and reside in the mother’s bloodstream and/or organs — including her heart and brain — for the rest of her life. This condition is called microchimerism, named after the Greek chimera, a creature composed of the parts of multiple animals. Pregnancy-related microchimerism explains why women with sons would have Y-chromosome sequences in their blood.
This is fascinating enough. But how do you explain why women without sons also have male cells circulating in their bloodstream?
This was the subject of a study by immunologists at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center. They took blood samples from 120 women without sons and found that 21 percent of them had male DNA. Women were then categorized into four groups according to pregnancy history: women with daughters only, spontaneous abortions, induced abortions, and no children/no abortions.
While the number of women bearing male DNA was highest in the groups that had abortions (nearly 80 percent), women who had only girls or no babies (20 percent) also had male cells in their blood. For no apparent reason.
There are other reasons why women in the fourth group carried male cells: inherited in the womb from a male twin that passed, from a miscarriage they did not know about, from their mother via an older brother…
Or through sexual intercourse. -
There remains a possibility, however remote, that cells from a lover may pass be transmitted during sex. Those cells may hang out forever in the recipient’s body, taking residence in any organ. These cells are the imprint of lovers past, a trace of living history.
Might a woman’s bodily fluids enter a cut in a man’s genitals as well? Could men carry around the genes of women they’ve slept with?
The imagination is stirred. What are those foreign cells doing in hearts and minds? Are they wreaking havoc in our heads? Do the cells of former lovers clash? In a science fiction scenario a person could even take a drop of her own blood, isolate a cell from her former boyfriend, and clone him. Then do with him what she will.
The upshot of this research? It’s yet another reason to use a condom.
Yeah, If they had said “everyone who has ever been pregnant”, it would include exactly the same people, wouldn’t it?
And the two shall become one flesh.
Is there a reason why we are not to eat pork? Can it have anything to do with how close the pig is to what a human is? Why the exclusion of meat from predators? Shellfish?
There’s a place in Acts where God removes the ban on certain foods. (paraphrase) “Do not call unclean that which God has made clean.”
National Security, what else? It works for everything else...
No, in fact, there isn't. Peter's dream is interpreted by Peter himself, just a few passages down. The dream is about accepting the gentiles into the church. The spin you have absorbed is the doctrine of a church, not the Word... To believe it is to believe that God changed what is declared to be unchangeable in the OT, and denies the direct, explicit commandment of Jesus Christ to keep and do the Torah, and denies the prophets who have predicted that the whole world will follow the law of God by the end.
But that is not the point here... I was just expanding upon the idea that Maelstorm introduced. Food laws are just one aspect. There are many things in the Bible having to do with DNA and seed that might be taken as physical that many have taken as spiritual... IF physical, the ramifications are daunting.
I’ve had thoughts along the same lines. I truly suspect that there is a lot more in those passages of Genesis and many ancient texts & legends than has typically been credited. There is some really interesting research involving epigenetics which suggests that indeed a person not only accumulates epigenetic changes but also passes them on based on environmental stimuli,etc.
Biological memories of past environments Epigenetic pathways to health disparities
http://www.academia.edu/630370/Biological_memories_of_past_environments_Epigenetic_pathways_to_health_disparities
THE EPIGENOME LEARNS FROM ITS EXPERIENCES
http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/epigenetics/epi_learns/
I think that there may have been in the past more advanced biotech rivaling even what we have today. The problem is such technology being so fragile by nature would almost certainly be unrecognizable. History is filled with depictions of chimera creatures and the technology to create them isn’t even extremely complicated as would be expected.
If what you are suggesting is even partially correct then the prospect of eating raw meat could have unforeseen results and the whole idea of absorbing the strength and qualities of your kill takes on a whole new meaning though I expect the immune system and digestive system would take care of most of that though.
It just goes to show how truly limited our understanding of the complexities of the biological world is. The one thing that is increasingly clear though is that our activities and choices not only effect our immediate lives but also the gene expression of our offspring. Many seem to be in denial of this or at least what it means in real terms however we see the same thing with psychology and the study of the brain which also dynamically changes not just to store memories but based on our common repeated behaviors and stimuli.
There are passages in the Bible (OT and NT) where instruction is given for specific persons or groups without being given for all of humankind. There are several scenes in the Bible which can only be understood to the greater depth with an understanding of modern Physics/Science, but the passages ring true from that time to ours because God is not a liar therefore He will not lie.
Peter's dream was, well, instructional, and for Gentiles a revelation on Salvation as well as instructional on foods. That dream did not remove the food restrictions on Jews, but it did reveal more than just the food regs donchaknow.
Thank you for the links... They will take some digestion before I comment, but, this is right along the lines of what I am speaking of. I had no idea that science had gone here at all. My, what an interesting study!
I think that there may have been in the past more advanced biotech rivaling even what we have today. The problem is such technology being so fragile by nature would almost certainly be unrecognizable. History is filled with depictions of chimera creatures and the technology to create them isn’t even extremely complicated as would be expected.
I would agree wholeheartedly. It is these incursions, where chimerism, transgenderism, androgyny, and other indicators occur that have my interest. My current work has unearthed an amazing correlation between these (as symptoms) and giant leaps in knowledge, followed by eventual destruction on an epic scale... I think it has happened more than once. But, you will have to wait for the book before I can discuss it with precision :P ... Leave it at the idea that when Man reaches too far, and messes with the natural order of things, invariably and predictably, wickedness appears in ways that confound the natural method of transmission of his seed - Culminating in a trespass not only of himself but of the order of kind (genre) generally. Destruction inevitably follows shortly.
If what you are suggesting is even partially correct then the prospect of eating raw meat could have unforeseen results and the whole idea of absorbing the strength and qualities of your kill takes on a whole new meaning though I expect the immune system and digestive system would take care of most of that though.
Actually, the instruction to heal with anointing with oils is patterned in 'essential oils' today. These highly concentrated plant oils absorb through the skin and are distributed by the lymphatic system primarily... bypassing both digestion and immune systems. It seems we are more porous than is generally assumed... Those same oils, in an edible grade, can sometimes have great (and different) effect by way of rubbing on the gums, for a direct entry into the blood (immunity is suppressed in the mouth). One might assume that if plants can be ingested in such a way, animal may well be able to follow likewise... Of course this is but a speculation on my part - Your observations remain true. But it is a caution...
It just goes to show how truly limited our understanding of the complexities of the biological world is. The one thing that is increasingly clear though is that our activities and choices not only effect our immediate lives but also the gene expression of our offspring. Many seem to be in denial of this or at least what it means in real terms however we see the same thing with psychology and the study of the brain which also dynamically changes not just to store memories but based on our common repeated behaviors and stimuli.
It is extraordinary, isn't it? 'The sins of the fathers' are passed down for generations, eh?
I don't think Peter was lied to - But Peter didn't understand... So he obviously took it to mean something other than it meant on it's face (because it couldn't mean what it seemed to mean, as God explicitly declared the Torah to be immutable... forever). That lack of understanding was washed away by an epiphany wrt the House of Cornelius, wherein Peter himself declares the meaning of the dream... And there is not one whiff of proof that Peter ran off to find a bacon-cheeseburger after the vision... He seems to have remained Torah observant, as did the other disciples.
And I flatly deny the idea that the object(s) used in the dream must be a true aspect - there are tons of examples of dreams in the Bible that had to be interpreted because the objects of the dream could not be understood. What is paramount in the dream is that YHWH never called the gentiles themselves unclean... Jewish Tradition did that... All the things in the dream were definitely defined as unclean. The meaning is not that 'these things are now clean (they cannot be made clean without breaking the Torah, which YHWH is declarative that he would not do)', but rather 'don't call unclean what YHWH has made clean'. The Gentiles are made clean by their desire to be clean just like any Jew.
There are passages in the Bible (OT and NT) where instruction is given for specific persons or groups without being given for all of humankind. There are several scenes in the Bible which can only be understood to the greater depth with an understanding of modern Physics/Science, but the passages ring true from that time to ours because God is not a liar therefore He will not lie.
Riight.... What stands in the way of that is the Prophets, who speak of a day when the Torah will go out from Jerusalem, and the whole world will keep it, to include specifically, the Sabbaths (the Sabbath and Holy Days). God will not be made a liar... You are right in that... and his prophets are his qualified agents - If they are lying, God is lying. So I will take the Torah and the Prophets over the traditions that teach counter to what they say.
Peter's dream was, well, instructional, and for Gentiles a revelation on Salvation as well as instructional on foods. That dream did not remove the food restrictions on Jews, but it did reveal more than just the food regs donchaknow.
I disagree profoundly that the food restrictions are 'for the Jews'. Yeshua gave an explicit command to do and to teach the Torah. That means every Christian, as there is no more 'Jew and Gentile'.
Um... huh?
I’m sure God will check with you before giving any further instructions to humankind ...
I just remembered something else about the fetal cells remaining after pregnancy.
There is some recent evidence that they enter into embryos in subsequent pregnancies. So, unless you are your mother's oldest child, you would have cells from your siblings in your body.
This would be another mechanism for women who only have daughters to have male cells in their bodies--those cells came from their older brothers.
These are amazing revelations.
("I never had sex with that woman", Bill Clinton)
How die mitochondria first get into nuclei? Could this be a related mechanism?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.