<JHasenkam from gmail.com> wrote in message news:373f2d2d-7345-4aec-82d0-df36cd951120 from s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
| On Mar 28, 11:20 am, "ken" <suffici... from havagoodday.org> wrote:
| > Earlier this 'evening', I heard a
| > report, by John Hamilton, on NPR's
| > =All Things Considered=.
|| > Even if the genetic material that was
| > analyzed was collected, say, from
| > the "Skin", be-cause [as I've reitera-
| > tively-discussed, over the 'years' here
| > in b.n, Immune-System function is a
| > form of Cognition that's under the com-
| > plete control of 'the' nervous system,
|| No it isn't, I consider the immune and CNS to have a "tortured"
I Stand on what I've posted.
| > an epigenetic phenomenon would
| > still be instantiated, via Immune-Sys-
| > tem function
|| Wrong, epigenetics involves changes in gene transcription(methylation,
| acetylation), not gene changes. It has bugger all to do with immune
| function but rather chromatin dynamics.
I discussed it, all the way down to just-
energy, including "transcription", in my
long-former posts in which I Demonstrat-
ed how and why activation of 'the genome'
is Rigorously-Coupled to experience via
TD E/I-minimization-governed 3D-Energy-
| [which is an absolute-
| > necessity if Immune-System function
| > is to remain able to Discern between
| > "Self" and "not-Self".
|| Old model, never use it, very misleading. You haven't read enough
| literature. Look up Polly Mattzinger. Try "Danger Model" . See this
||http://focosi.immunesig.org/index2.html|| Brilliant immune website.
I cannot allow myself to go on the
web, so I don't know what the link
you've cited has to say, but I 'pre-
sume' that a "Danger Model" is
just a 'transformation' of "relative-
TD E/I" as it's been discussed in
AoK all along.
I no longer go to 'the' Library because,
when I do, most of what I See, when I
do, are instances of the Same-Stuff --
papers in which the 3D-E of "relative-
TD E/I" -- the stuff I've been discussing
online for 20 'years', and offline for 30
'years' -- are 'transformed' -- with nary
So, I Stand on what I've posted.
As in, "The Genome", not 'the genome'.
"The Genome" as "whole-body", and
how and why it's all Integrated with
respect to the 'external'-experiential-
3D-E that Individuals experience.
Including, BTW, the disordered-3D-E
that are instantiated 'within' 'the'
"body" by disease processes.
I understand -- and stated that I un-
derstand -- that what I've been dis-
cussing is not "the standard view".
Same as I've been doing in every-
thing I've ever discussed here in
b.n, or elsewhere.
Which is the only reason why I dis-
cuss anything I discuss.
I've written Testable-stuff into my
discussions in this thread [as I always
try to do]. When it's Tested -- if it's
Tested -- what I've written will, in-
General, be Verified.
I've been trying, all along, to show
folks how, and why, such "Prediction"
can be done -- explicitly-stating that
that was what I was doing in my pri-
or posts in this thread -- even though
I've not gotten past the 1% 'point'.
How else can one teach the 99%?
Not use it just because no one else
understands it yet?
'restrict' my 'movement' to only what
folks already 'agree'-upon?
Sorry, I don't 'wear' that 'straitjacket' :-]
Get 'beaten'-on 'all the time' for no
other 'reason' than that I don't.
'clubs' 'love' their 'straitjackets'.
"I'm used to it." [A. Lincoln]
ken [k. p. collins]