I recently heard a woman argue that “science” has proven that thoughts can change DNA, and they used this as a premise for new age thinking and the belief that wishful thinking has power over the physical world. It was obvious she didn’t even know how to structure an argument properly, and I don’t suffer fools gladly, so I ignored the side conversation I could have jumped into. After leaving the event I began pondering on the quote from Alexander Pope “A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.”
One of the conclusions the party I ignored came to was that modern medicine was not necessary since you could cure yourself with your thoughts and a proper “natural” diet. To address this lets go back and address what epigenetics and nutrition are and do.
Epigenetics changes gene expression, not the actual genetic code. This is in relation of how a gene is used. For example: a single gene might have the information to produce twenty different proteins, but which protein is being produce will be determined by the RNA. Which gene is being ignored and used will also be affected through epigenetics. The Y chromosome affects the gene expression of the X Chromosome. So while a male and female might have the exact same X chromosome, the expression of that same X chromosome will change due to the Y chromosome effects on it.
Note: This also relates to the hilarious attempt of feminists in their vocal “quest for gender equality” through claims of genetic superiority to males stating that the second X chromosome is larger than the Y, and therefore they have more genetic material and are superior to men. Only one gene from either X pair is being used at a time, some the “extra genes” aren’t even in use. The only time it may come in handy is if one of the genes from one of the X chromosomes are defective, but the other one is fine, and the cell will ignore the defective gene and go with the healthy expression. Other than that there is no “extra” information making women superior, these are different expressions of the same genes. If you would want to get technical it’s the Y chromosome adding extra layers of information to the expression of the X chromosome, but to claim this is a sign of superiority would be to succumb to the illogical rhetoric of the feminist. Here a link to reference of men being an “incomplete female” and thus inferior to women I’ve heard myself on campus (which by their own logic of gender and disability issues you would think that if men are the incomplete females we would be on the top of the line for all the privileges the feminists want to claim for themselves): “incomplete females.”
So gene expression refer to which gene is being read and how it’s being read. The epigenetics movement seems to be revealing that in some cases our gene expression capabilities is reading the environment, and based of this information its altering how genes are being expressed. An example in humans will be the way you digest, use and store calories. If one of your ancestors were in starvation mode, specially a mother or grandmother during pregnancy, this will affect a whole array of genes on how we use calories for generations to come. I forgot the reference source but one article I read on bacterial illustrates this rather clear. A colony of bacteria is placed on a petri dish and given X food source. Then the food source changes into something they lack the enzymes or physical tools to digest. Based on our concept of evolution we would have assumed that a few, or single bacteria had a mutation in the colony (if they were lucky enough to have at least one!), these would survive and reproduce while the rest of the bacterial population would die out and be replaced by descendants of said mutation that allowed to digest said food.
It turned out that the entire petri dish changed their genetic expression to be able to digest said food at the same time. They were reading the environment and alter themselves at a genetic level (I do believe it was gene expression but this example could have been restructuring the actual DNA and show a new path of evolution).
So, back to humans. We have similar ways to change gene expression. A lot of this has to do with emotions and diet. One study showed that New York mothers who were pregnant during the traumatic event of 9-11 had their children with anxiety issues (or some other mental health disorder that showed a strong correlation). Mice clones with exact genetic material are put into two mothers in different cages. One mother lives a stress free life, while the other is subjected to loud noises. The stress free fetus starts developing its brain first, and its significantly larger to the stressed out clone in another cage. Intelligence scores in these adults show that the change is permanent. On the other hand the stress free mouse fetus is glowing a small skeletal and muscle mass, while the stressed mouse has a huge body built. The conclusion here is that stress levels are telling the genetic code building the fetus on what to express themselves and focus resources on. The stress free mouse can afford to develop a large brain and smaller body, the stressed mouse focuses on larger body and smaller brain since it probably will need to be running or psychically fighting (overcrowded living space for example).
Similar effects can be found with the Winner and Loser effect which I’ve written about elsewhere. Essentially winning and losing changes individuals epigenetically. Generally, winners will increase dopamine and androgen receptors in key areas in the brain, which will affect personality and behavior making them smarter, bolder and more socially dominant. The opposite effect happens when losing. Our thought can affect this, but it’s linked to the emotions our thoughts create, which is what is transmitting the messages for the epigenetic changes (which makes sense since emotions are chemical messages). For example: If you don’t care about the said competition then you will see no winner or loser effect (lets say is some harmless game you’re playing with a child). If you do care about the competition and win, you’ll have the winner effect. If you’re playing as a team and win, your belief on the contribution to that win will vary the winner effect you had (if they couldn’t do it without you or if they would have won regardless of your performance). How closely you identify with the winning group (sports fans will have winning and losing effects even thought they aren’t directly participating). You could have a winner effect even if you lost if you get angry and attribute the loss not on your personal ability (you aren’t inherently inferior) but it was due to some other cause, luck, deceit, unfair circumstances against you had things being equal you would have won, a bad strategy from your part you can easily correct, etc. You can have a loser effect if you win against close friends (study being done with video games were if friends won against strangers they all had a winner effect, but if played against each other they all had a loser effect, the winner of the game had the strongest loser effect).
A lot of the changes being applied are due to the social relationships and status your mind is reading, which can have a deep emotional effect in you, which your body uses to affect your brain physiologically and thus your behavior. For example: If you are X animal and easily win a physical contest against your peers, it will benefit you to act more dominant and fight for access to resources, territory and women. But if you continually lose, fighting others can get you seriously injured and killed. Context matters. This is one of the justification for the behavior mentioned above.
Another example is that nature has created a way to punish backstabbers and traitors, as is the case with the loser effect being applied to the winners when they compete against their close friends, but having a winner effect when they compete against strangers. Another study shows that males will generally have their testosterone rise with the presence of an attractive women, but if they know the women is the partner of one of their friends of a high status and dominant male, their testosterone will lower in the presence of that woman. Again, subconscious mechanisms we are just finding about physically changing the brain to change behavior of the individual in the context of survival within a group. Fascinating stuff.
So it’s a bit more complicated than simply saying thoughts will affect your DNA expression, and works in ways not even the scientific community is fully aware of (some of these studies shows that there are physiological changes such as testosterone regulation for said events in said contexts, but they aren’t fully understood). So to say you can say, lose body fat or regrow your hair by the power of thought is absurd, these gene expressions are not targeting specific thoughts in your mind, but are built in mechanisms through interactions of DNA and RNA. An example could be body temperature regulation. The body constantly strives to find temperature balance as the environment temperature changes.
There are cases were Buddhists monks supposedly can control their temperature, heart beat and brain waves at will, but this isn’t any evidence for epigenetic change, and a western woman who read some pop science article doesn’t have this ability of the Buddhist monk.
And diet is generally the breakdown of certain chemicals we need. While its true that deficiency of said compound could cure an ailment caused by said deficiency, being “natural” and “organic” isn’t some magical formula to cure all and while there have been, and are some problems with modern medicine, this doesn’t mean modern medicine is charlatanism. Just a few centuries ago a significant amount of women would die in childbirth, and our species in general would die from diseases and infections that are completely preventable today. The “natural is best” argument is absurdity.