Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To wonder what repectable scientific notions of today....

233 replies

RubyGates · 30/12/2012 22:08

will be laughed at in a hundred year's time?

Things that were believed by scientists in the past:
www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-famous-scientific-theories-that-turned-out-to-be-wrong.php

OP posts:
EllieArroway · 04/01/2013 14:15

I want to speak up for homeopathy. It might be the placebo effect but that is irrelevant if it cures people's illness

If it cured people's illnesses it would be a recognised part of modern medicine. It doesn't, so it's not.

Avuncular · 04/01/2013 18:01

Getting back to the OP for a moment, how about the sociological 'theory' that "with Education the world will automatically become a better place" ?

GrimmaTheNome · 04/01/2013 18:24

Getting back to the OP for a moment, how about the sociological 'theory' that "with Education the world will automatically become a better place" ?

not exactly 'science' and difficult to define 'better'. Or even 'education'. But I doubt the general premise that education is a Good Thing will become laughable.

JoTheHot · 04/01/2013 18:41

difficult to define 'better'.......Oh, I don't know about that. Education reduces overpopulation and religious oppression. Two unambiguously and overpoweringly good outcomes. I'm sure there are many others.

Binkybix · 05/01/2013 16:48

The impression I got from the book (and some of the quoted research) was that in some cases methylation is all but irreversible in the individual - hence why early environmental experience etc may be so vital to future outcomes and not as easy to 'undo' the effects of later for some organisms as one might assume. So functionally the gene will always be repressed from then on, meaning that it could have an equivalent effect on phenotype as a mutation (obvs effect on phenotype of both mutation and epigenetic modification is normally very complex though).

It did talk about some inheritance between generations triggered by epigenetic events in the mother including looking at Dutch famine (although am a bit hazy on suggested mechanisms for effect in children). As I say though, it wasn't really focused principally on epigenetics and evolution.

On the placebo effect and drug companies - don't they have to show an effect above and beyond the placebo effect in clinical trials? Isn't that the reason for double blind studies?

alcibiades · 05/01/2013 21:07

I haven't yet got into the Nessa Carey book, but I've found some notes I made while watching a set of lectures on DVD by Robert Sapolsky. These lectures are aimed at intelligent/interested laypeople rather than specialists, so are somewhat (and perhaps necessarily) simplified. Moreover, they're my notes which are probably even more simplified. (They're also long - I've never figured out how to write succinctly.) Obviously, any errors are mine:

  • - - -

Maternal stress ? increase in the level of stress hormones, glucocorticoids, which readily cross the placental barrier. This can affect the growth of the foetus, including the brain, because the foetus' system reacts to the flight or fight hormones in much the same way as the mother's ?activities not essential to survival are slowed down. Chronic maternal stress can result in a baby with a smaller than expected brain.

What are the consequences of being born with a smaller brain as a consequence of chronic exposure to high levels of glucocorticoids? One part of the brain that is involved with turning off glucocorticoid secretion at the end of a stress episode is smaller than average. So the baby doesn't have a system that's efficient at controlling glucocorticoid levels. If that baby is a female and subsequently becomes pregnant, her foetus is more likely to experience similar high levels of glucocorticoids, and so on. This is a trait that isn't genetic in a Mendelian sense. It's a long-lasting effect that can transcend many generations, before gradually diminishing.

Maternal nutrition ? there are mechanisms that preferentially feed the foetus in cases where maternal nutrition is low. However, extremely low maternal nutrition can have long-lasting effects on further generations. In the winter of 1944-45, the Nazis were occupying Holland but food resources in the country were already low. The Nazis took all the food for themselves and that, combined with a harsh winter that prevented Allied food supplies getting through, resulted in about 10,000 deaths with the primary cause of malnutrition. After Holland was liberated, food supplies returned to normal. Foetuses during this famine, especially in the second and third trimesters, were affected because during that phase of development the metabolism system is developing. They were born smaller than expected, because of poor maternal nutrition, but they also went on as adults to have smaller children. The cause of this is the development of a very thrifty metabolism, unusually efficient at storing away nutrients and salt. The people who were foetuses at the time of the famine were later more at risk for adult-onset diabetes, obesity, and hypertension. When they became pregnant, their metabolic system reduced the level of nutrition reaching their foetus.

  • - - -

If anyone has managed to read through all of that and wants to reach for their red pen, then please do so. One of the problems that I, and probably many other people, have is that our learning can often be just one-way, with no feedback as to whether we're on the right track.

Gracelo · 06/01/2013 08:08

This is getting more complicated and fascinating the more I think about it.
There must be a difference to the fate of epigenetic DNA modification in somatic cells as opposed to germ cells. I can see how it makes sense in a somatic cell, once it has differentiated, to turn many genes off for good but in a germ cell surely the situation is different. An entire new organism has to differentiate from that, surely this means an almost identical pattern of methylation/demethylation to that in the parent organism has to occur in this germ cell. How are some modifications maintained - as in the example of the Dutch - and most aren't? It's baffling me.

I'm actually quite heartened to see what little support homeopathy has in GB. It's by now utterly mainstream in Germany (as it seems in France) and anyone voicing criticism is accused of being narrow minded and worse. I was in Germany for Christmas and every pharmacy is advertising homeopathic "remedies". I was very very tempted to storm into one and tell them they should be ashamed of themselves. It's one thing for lay people to think it's valid but for a pharmacist who spent years at a university doing science this is a shocking lack of scientific rigour.

Binkybix · 06/01/2013 08:23

Gracelo, there is stuff in the egg that can pretty much re-programme epigenetic modifications meaning that they are pretty much removed from both parents' DNA. Sorry, can't remember how that works either or what the stuff is.

This can be recreated to a degree in the lab to make a somatic cell closer to a stem cell in potential, but it's not as efficient and can result in later problems (eg Dolly the sheep died young and had very early on-set arthritis I think)

LeBFG · 06/01/2013 09:42

From what I remember Gracelo, the germ cells are fresh i.e. unmethylated, and as cells differentiate after fertilisation they methylate etc as certain genes are swtiched on/off. This is why scientists like stem cells - they still maintain their 'open' state - and why there are lots of these stem cells still present in young fetuses/embryos.

How are somatic variations passed on through the germ line? I'm sure there are many ways. alcibiades describes two well. The environment in which the fetus is developing in will have an effect in mammals. There's no evidence these changes persist over many generations though.

Wasn't the thing with Dolly was that the telomeres (ends of chromosomes) age so when they cloned the DNA, although it had been 'reset', the telemeres were still old. Programmed senescence set in early as a result. Could be barking up the wrong tree though.

Gracelo · 06/01/2013 12:32

But if all germ cells start out entirely unmethylated how is epigenetic information then passed on from parent and even grandparent to offspring? They need to be modified at the moment of fertilization for that at the latest, I would assume. I'm sure I have read that epigentic information can be passed on from gp to grandchild, but maybe this is not as certain as some reports claim. For me the timescales don't quite add up, in species with long generation times like us humans at least. If famine means to pass on epigenetic information to offspring it doesn't seem to make much sense if we talk human lifespans. My grandmother was 60 when I was born and there had been 2 world wars and much other stuff during her life but by the time I was born (1966) Germany was booming, no famine in sight. Her famine modifications would not have been of much use to me. For mice or rabbits with more than one generation in a year this would make sense. Maybe this actually evolved in species with shorter generation times and is still hanging around in humans now.
And I just remembered imprinting. How does that all fit in?
I'm aware that I'm rambling a bit now, I just try to make sense of it all in my head.

The telomer shortening throughout life is due to how DNA polymerases work. The short end piece of DNA that the polymerases need to get started doesn't get replicated, so with every cell cycle the telomers get a bit shorter and at some point the telomers are so short that DNA replication becomes a bit wonky. In microbes with circular chromosomes this is not a problem this occurs only in linear chromosomes.

Mayisout · 06/01/2013 13:23

I don't really believe that Homeopathy is purely a placebo but described it as that to argue with the naysayers ie if it is a successful placebo then why not use it regardless. But if a health cure has been used for decades then there must be something in it imo.

Also, it is very hard to do clinical trials which may be affected by the psychological support felt by the patient by visiting a caring and knowledgable doctor or homeopath. And 'talking therapy' which can have great success with many illnesses can't be measured unless you turn away would be patients, 'sorry I'm not treating you as you I need use you as a control in a clinical trial, come back in six months and don't seek any other help'. That's not going to happen.

FiveHoursSleep · 06/01/2013 13:25

That you have to be within a certain weight range to be healthy and happy.

LeBFG · 06/01/2013 13:55

The cells in a body multiply and then differentiate. They differentiate depending on different patterns of cell signals across the developing organism. It's in these differentiated cells that we find the patterns of methylation. The uterine environment will give signals to a developing fetus. Sometimes there is a thing known as genetic imprinting - this is where mother or father's methylation pattern is inherited which happens despite wiping clean the DNA as germ cells are formed. I'm not sure how much is known about these processes. I know they are quite a feature of mammals. A lot of the epigenetics stuff is much more of a feature in plants and microbes. I don't know why.

I would hazard a guess that the example you give Gracelo about the famine response is an adaptive feature of humans. Throughout our evolutionary history, we've always had periods of famine. Famine/lean years may last one year or many decades. The imprinting is a great example of an adaptation for the organism i.e. when the going gets tough, best not to grow tall and invest calories making long bones, tissue etc. Perhaps the second generation effect is a good card to play: best to be small just in case bad times continue. Or perhaps it's an unavoidable consquence of the initial imprinting event. I don't know. Also, worth remembering that generational turnover was much higher in our past. Women are pretty fertile by the age of 16 or something and peaks at quite a young age. I would doubt very much the human species had this capacity if it was really no longer beneficial as small stature must have other survival consquences.

LeBFG · 06/01/2013 14:08

I agree that it would be difficult, impossible even, to do a double blind trial with 'talking therapies' or something like acupuncture. But for a great many other things, this is really easy. You give a sugar pill or a 'homeopathy' sugar pill + gumph about how it'll make you feel better. In reiki, the patients have their eyes closed and are not touched.

For the ones you can't do DBT, you can still do comparative studies. Treatment group A: radiology. Treatment group B: woo.

I think most UK HPs would agree that it's better to treat with stuff that works over and above the placebo effect i.e. you get the placebo and some.

On a tangent, I read a great book on brain development where they are looking at how a combination of drugs and counselling can effect changes on brain structure that could be monitored i.e. you would see the effects of these treatments directly on the brain. The way we see brains and treat mental illness will revolutionise over the next 100 years.

EllieArroway · 06/01/2013 15:23

But if a health cure has been used for decades then there must be something in it imo

Well, not really. Trepanning has been used since prehistoric times, but I'm not about to drill a hole in my head when I get a migraine. Are you? Homeopathy has lasted because people have a habit of believing exactly what they want to believe & are perfectly willing to disregard any evidence to the contrary in order to continue to believe it. This accounts for why people still believe in god & ghosts, in my opinion.

And the problem with homeopathy isn't so much whether it works or not - I'm quite sure for some people it does, sort of. I'm convinced that many of the things that we take to our GP are being exacerbated by worry & tension - so take that out of the equation, or at least lessen it and - ta dah! - "cures" are effected.

No, the real problem with homeopathy is that, if it were actually true, we would need to rip up all of our science books and start again. The idea of water holding a memory goes against everything biology, chemistry and physics have taught us over the past few hundred years. It's nonsense - laughable nonsense.

And I shall wait patiently here for someone to show up and misquote Shakespeare at me.....Wink

EllieArroway · 06/01/2013 15:27

In terms of future science - I think wormholes will be discovered. I also think some kind of life will be found on Titan, probably microbial. Which would be so exciting:)

Gracelo · 06/01/2013 16:32

LeBFG, in the Dutch example people are getting bigger though, don't they? Microbiologist don't really use the term epigenetics for DNA modification in microbes. I had this discussion with a colleague a while ago and I could only find one published microbiologist who uses the term. It's almost impossible to distinguish generations in an experiment. A microbial culture is made out of many different generations, synchronization is possible, but difficult and not maintained for long and in fast growing cells you often see DNA replication starting on chromosomes which are not even fully replicated themselves. The observed record for E. coli is 7 replication forks, so even within one cell you can have several generations of chromosomes.

GrimmaTheNome · 06/01/2013 16:46

Ellie - is 'There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy' the quote you were expecting?

Taking 'heaven' to mean the rest of the universe(s), may well be true. But I'd bet a pound to a gooseberry it doesn't include water having a memory for particular substances if they've been added and diluted in a particular way but no memory for fish wee etc.

Gracelo, I think most pharmacies in the UK stock homeopathic 'remedies' too - hence the recent mass 'overdosing' protest outside branches of Boots Grin

EllieArroway · 06/01/2013 18:01

Yes, Grimma.

But it's a literary way of saying "Well, science doesn't know everything, you know" which is backwards logic when we're actually discussing what we DO know - or at least are 99.99% sure of.

Gracelo · 06/01/2013 18:19

Well, just because we don't know everything doesn't mean we can just make up stuff.
What bugs me is when people imply that scientist are complicit in a massive cover up. That if anyone would show that water has memory it would never be published. This is completely not getting the point of what makes scientists tick. Scientists are actually interested in "the Truth" (there might be exceptions but I haven't met many of them yet), they like to find out how the world really works. If there were serious evidence that water has memory the big journals would try to be the first to publish it and the sciency blogs would be buzzing. Scientific findings which are well supported might be only reluctantly accepted but they are not kept secret.

Grima, I know British pharmacies sell homeopathy as well but it really is nothing like in Germany. Pretty much every magazine and paper treats it as main stream medicine. Every health column, usually by a medical doctor, recommends HP remedies without the tiniest disclaimer to say that there is no evidence that HP actually works. A few years ago, my then 4 year old dd had earache while we were in D for a visit and as it was Sunday evening my sister rang a few of her friends with young children because we didn't bring the Calpol and every single one offered us something homeopathic not one of them even had calpol in the house. We went to the on duty pharmacy to get some pain relief for her.

Avuncular · 06/01/2013 18:45

The more I learn, the smaller my percentage estimate of what I know compared with the Sum of All Possible Knowledge. With you lot on the job, I'm rapidly progressing to the point of being relatively totally ignorant.

Anyway when we celebrate our next wedding anniversary the answer will be: 42 !

Keep it coming, though please.

Highlander · 06/01/2013 18:45

For a fantastic history of cancer, I can highly recommend 'The Emperor of all Maladies'. Very readable (un-put-downable for me, but I'm a scientist!).

LeBFG · 06/01/2013 18:57

I don't know anything much about microbes Gracelo. I can see an epigenic effect would be difficult to describe. As for famines, I think it depends on the famine (from memory): some have measured things like stature, others diabetes etc. It makes sense that if you have imprinting to help you through tough times to use every bit of what you are able to eat, when times are not so tough you put on weight rapidly (in fact, doesn't this happen over individual life spans? I'm reminded of the WW2 Jew survivors that as adults went on to develop obesity, or even people on strict diets that then gain more than they lose v rapidly)...

I'm always a bit Hmm as to why people want to place their faith in something like homeopathy that some bloke just made up. I might start up my own new alternative therapy...seems like there's some money in it after all.

GrimmaTheNome · 06/01/2013 19:03

Scientists are actually interested in "the Truth" (there might be exceptions but I haven't met many of them yet), they like to find out how the world really works.

Spot on.

And as to the Hamlet quote - its far more applicable to non-scientific philosophies (especially religious ones depending on fixed texts and 'revealed truths' - presumably what Horatio's would have been) than to science.

LeBFG · 06/01/2013 19:15

Thanks for the recommendation Highlander - now on wishlist. In return, I shall recommend the book I liked to do with the brain: In Search of Memory By Eric Kandel. It's not all equally well written, but fascinating to follow the the career of one man spanning such amazing advances. It was also made into a documentary. Kandel is one of science's great characters! I couldn't read it without hearing his wonderful broad Jewish Brooklyn accent narrating. Great stuff.