yojimbo5681 at my-deja.com wrote:
>> In article <199910151547.LAA22120 at milo.math.sc.edu>,
> Peter Nyikos <nyikos at math.sc.edu> wrote:
>> > I don't see why the role of proteins couldn't be played
> > by ribozymes. In fact, the "loosey-goosey" nature of RNA
> > molecules (as one person put it) might actually be an asset
> > here: our own neurons aren't the simple on/off things early
> > researchers assumed, and RNA molecules might actually permit
> > a wider range of responses.
>> i see our resident bio-chemist is now claiming that ribozymes can
> substitute for proteins.
>> leaving aside that interestingly quaint notion for a bit, he then
> proposes that RNA, as opposed to protein, might make neurons more
> flexible and responsive.
>> before i really start to lay into him on this one, i would like dr. p to
> more clearly explain what he means by this interesting statement.
>> to further facilitate discussion, i have added bionet.neuroscience.
Cruel, cruel, cruel. Both to Peter and the people reading
bionet.neuroscience. I sincerely recommend that all efforts be made to
keep Peter off *real* science talk groups. It only irritates the
readers.
>> --
> tu marche et, tu marche et,
> tu baille effete typique
> heaume et gaine - heaume et gaine
> gigote chic!
>> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/> Before you buy.
