Epigenetics explains Dominate and Recessive traits better than NeoDarwinism


Neo-Darwinism is a term used to describe any integration of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection with Gregor Mendel's theory of genetics. It mostly refers to evolutionary theory from either 1895 (for the combinations of Darwin's and August Weismann's theories of evolution) or 1942 ("modern synthesis"), but it can mean any new Darwinian- and Mendelian-based theory, such as the current evolutionary theory.

There are many aspects of evolution that neo darwinism does not explain well. One of these is the existence of dominant and recessive genes.

Dominant genes are those that are expressed even if only one copy is present in an organism. Recessive genes are only expressed if both copies are present.

Neo Darwinism cannot explain why dominant and recessive genes exist, or how they arose. This is because neo darwinism is based on the principle that natural selection acts on individual traits. However, dominance and recessiveness are properties of genes, not traits.

Here are several ways dominant and recessive genes are not explained by neo darwinism:

  1. Dominant and recessive genes are properties of genes, not traits. A gene is a unit of heredity that is passed down from parents to offspring. A trait is a characteristic of an organism, such as eye color or height. Neo Darwinism is based on the principle that natural selection acts on individual traits.

  2. Dominant and recessive genes can exist for the same trait. For example, both the brown eye gene and the blue eye gene exist for eye color. Neo Darwinism should select out a recessive trait.

  3. Dominant and recessive genes can interact with each other in complex ways. For example, the gene for sickle cell anemia is recessive, but it can be beneficial in areas where malaria is common.

  4. Dominant and recessive genes can be influenced by the environment. This is because epigenetics can occur without changes in the underlying DNA sequence. For example, the gene for lactose intolerance is recessive, but it can be expressed in people who do not consume enough dairy products.

  5. Dominant and recessive genes can be affected by mutations. Mutations can affect dominant and recessive genes in a number of ways. For example, a mutation can disrupt the function of a dominant gene, making it recessive. Or, a mutation can activate a recessive gene, making it dominant.

  6. Dominant and recessive genes can be passed down from parents to offspring in unpredictable ways. For example, a child with two parents who have brown eyes can still inherit the blue eye gene from their grandparents.

  7. Dominant and recessive genes can be associated with diseases. For example, the gene for Huntington's disease is dominant.

  8. Dominant and recessive genes are important for human diversity. For example, the gene for skin color is determined by multiple dominant and recessive genes.


Epigenetics is the study of how changes in gene expression can be passed down from generation to generation without changing the underlying DNA sequence. 

Here are several ways epigenetics explains dominant and recessive genes better than neo darwinism:

  1. Epigenetics explains how dominant and recessive traits can be influenced by environmental factors. For example, the gene for agouti coat color in mice is dominant. However, if pregnant mice are exposed to a certain type of chemical during pregnancy, their offspring will have yellow coats instead of the agouti coat color. This is because the chemical causes the agouti gene to be turned off in the offspring.

  2. Epigenetics explains how dominant and recessive traits can be passed down from parents to offspring, even if the traits are not expressed in the parents. For example, a child with cystic fibrosis can inherit the disease from two parents who do not have the disease. This is because the parents may be carriers of the cystic fibrosis gene, meaning that they have one copy of the gene but do not have the disease because they also have a copy of the normal gene. However, the parents can pass down the recessive cystic fibrosis gene to their offspring, who may then develop the disease if they inherit two copies of the gene.

  3. Epigenetics explains how dominant and recessive traits can be influenced by the microbiome. The microbiome is the community of trillions of bacteria that live in our bodies. The microbiome can influence gene expression by producing chemicals that interact with DNA and other epigenetic factors. For example, studies have shown that the microbiome can influence the expression of genes that play a role in obesity, diabetes, and other diseases.

  4. Epigenetics explains how dominant and recessive traits can be influenced by stress. When we experience stress, our bodies produce hormones that can alter gene expression. For example, chronic stress can lead to epigenetic changes that increase the risk of depression and other mental health disorders.

Neodarwinism does not adequately explain these phenomena because it does not take into account the role of epigenetics.

It is important to note that epigenetics is a complex and rapidly evolving field of research. There is still much that we do not know about how epigenetics influences gene expression and human health. However, the research that has been done so far suggests that epigenetics plays a major role in determining which dominant and recessive traits are expressed in individuals.

This research has the potential to lead to new treatments and prevention strategies for a variety of genetic diseases. For example, researchers are developing drugs that can target epigenetic modifications and reverse the harmful epigenetic changes that are associated with disease.

Overall, epigenetics provides a more complete and nuanced understanding of how dominant and recessive genes work than neodarwinism.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Epigenetics explains Neanderthal and Human differences better than Neo-Darwinism

Many Evolutionists can't "evolve" with Epigenetics

Why are Christian philosophers running towards Darwin while biologists are "running" away?