Guest guest Posted June 21, 2001 Report Share Posted June 21, 2001 Hi Dawn Rose I wouldn't worry too much about how they figured out that we have 23 pairs of chromosomes. Light microscopes have been around since the 1500s and when any cell in our body (cheek cells from a saliva swab work) is in telophase (a phase in cell division), pairs of chromosomes are plainly visible. They can easily be counted in all cells during telophase and are visible in the phase before that (anaphase). They were also doing work and discovered all animals with eukaryotic cells (including us) were diploid back in 1910 by doing work on fruit flies. Now, it took them a while to figure out what chromosomes were (sometime in the 1800s), but they were easy to count. Nothing drastic had to be done and they didn't have to use sex cells to figure it out. Now, RAI is a different story. Take care, > > ... it is my feeling that if the medical profession could " indulge " in this > kind of reflection for five minutes, it might make LEAPS and BOUNDS beyond > itself rather than being tied up in the kind of traditions that prevent it > from seeing, for instance, that we do in fact have 23 chromosomes; or that > RAI is kind of drastic when you think about it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2001 Report Share Posted June 21, 2001 Hi Dawn Rose I wouldn't worry too much about how they figured out that we have 23 pairs of chromosomes. Light microscopes have been around since the 1500s and when any cell in our body (cheek cells from a saliva swab work) is in telophase (a phase in cell division), pairs of chromosomes are plainly visible. They can easily be counted in all cells during telophase and are visible in the phase before that (anaphase). They were also doing work and discovered all animals with eukaryotic cells (including us) were diploid back in 1910 by doing work on fruit flies. Now, it took them a while to figure out what chromosomes were (sometime in the 1800s), but they were easy to count. Nothing drastic had to be done and they didn't have to use sex cells to figure it out. Now, RAI is a different story. Take care, > > ... it is my feeling that if the medical profession could " indulge " in this > kind of reflection for five minutes, it might make LEAPS and BOUNDS beyond > itself rather than being tied up in the kind of traditions that prevent it > from seeing, for instance, that we do in fact have 23 chromosomes; or that > RAI is kind of drastic when you think about it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2001 Report Share Posted June 21, 2001 Ok fair play. Let me challenge you for once. Give us a reference before 1951 that says we have 23 pairs of chromosomes. I believe I did say that they were clearly visible but no one took that time to count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2001 Report Share Posted June 21, 2001 Ok fair play. Let me challenge you for once. Give us a reference before 1951 that says we have 23 pairs of chromosomes. I believe I did say that they were clearly visible but no one took that time to count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2001 Report Share Posted June 21, 2001 Well - I'm not playing with you and I'm not challenging you. That just seemed such a bizarre post and I'd never heard anything like that in all the years it took me to get my master's in biology. I don't have any references other than plain old biology texts and I'm not going to take the time to find it. I find it interesting that I could count chromosomes easily when I was a 1st year biology student yet an experienced scientist is unable to do so. You are right about chimps having 24 and us having 23. Perhaps, that scientist was doing some offshoot study but I've never heard of him. Heaven knows, some pretty unsavory things were done in the name of science. I could ask my advisor who was a biology student at the time you're talking about. He never mentioned such a thing to me and he loved to talk about the foibles of science. I've known the man for 10 years so you'd think it'd come up considering we yapped all the time. I do find it fascinating though that scientists were able to unravel the mystery of DNA in the 50s but were curiously unable to count chromosomes until then with a light microscope if what you say is true. And chromosomes in telophase are completely untangled. Now, I'm not going to discuss it anymore. Both views are out here so people can choose what they want to believe. Take care, > Ok fair play. Let me challenge you for once. Give us a reference > before 1951 that says we have 23 pairs of chromosomes. I believe I did > say that they were clearly visible but no one took that time to count. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2001 Report Share Posted June 23, 2001 Hi , >>>>Now, RAI is a different story.<<<< Okay...story hour please? Jody _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2001 Report Share Posted June 23, 2001 Hi Jody- My favorite rant! Why do they think the gland that makes the hormone that drives metabolism and is needed by every single cell in the body superfluous? And, amazingly, that we don't really need one. Just take a little pill/day. And how can a single exogenous dose of thyroid hormone take into account all the fluctuations that a person's body goes through (diurnal, monthly, seasonal, stress, etc...). It can't. Just didn't work very well with me and it doesn't make sense. I hope they start engineering thyroids too. I don't have any anti-thyroid antibodies anymore, so who knows, maybe I'd be fine. Take care, > Hi , > >>>>Now, RAI is a different story.<<<< > > Okay...story hour please? > Jody Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2001 Report Share Posted June 23, 2001 Oh yes! Another one. Graves' is an autoimmune disease primarily and it makes little sense to target the thyroid which is only a secondary problem. It's almost an ethical issue. I believe they should be working on stopping the cause of the disease not one symptom. They have what they believe are effective treatments and there's not a lot of money going into finding novel ways to treat the actual problem (the immune system). Take care, > Hi , > >>>>Now, RAI is a different story.<<<< > > Okay...story hour please? > Jody Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 24, 2001 Report Share Posted June 24, 2001 Hi , How can the medical profession expect something synthetic to replace what our bodies are capable of doing and should be doing, *IF* they would quit destroying our organs for their own convenience! Do you think any of the stem cell research will ever be able to replace or rejuvenate our thyroids, for those of us that have had RAI? Stem cell research makes me more hopeful than the Genome Project. It just seems closer. Take care, Jody _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 24, 2001 Report Share Posted June 24, 2001 , To see more research dollars put into auto immune disease, and more knowledge of the thyroid it is going to take several high mucky mucks getting GD or other AI's and they will have to be treated the same way we are. I can't help but wonder, the Bush's' both have GD, I believe both went through RAI, what kind of treatment are they getting now that they just act like everything is hunky-dorry, nothing to it. If they were getting the same treatment as the rest of us, and feeling like most of us RAIers do...maybe they could have done something in this area. They are either getting much better treatment or are lying! Same with Gayle Devers...my sister had the opportunity to meet her at the Nike Indoor Classic last year in Bloomington, Indiana where our son was running (she lives there and we weren't able to make it) My sister was telling her I have GD also and Devers told her she was *cured* so my sister now thinks all of my problems are in my head. I lost a LOT of respect for Devers since then. Take care, Jody _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 6, 2001 Report Share Posted July 6, 2001 Hi again Jody- Gail Devers has no idea what's ahead. She probably really does think she was " cured " . Heaven knows she's had it pumped into her head like the rest of us. I do know that I did the same thing she's doing. I worked and worked to make my body perfect so it wouldn't betray me. It lasted for a while but problems eventually started to emerge (I also had 7 years extra with this disease). I have no doubt that when that starts happening to Devers, her doctors will listen (she's still younger than 40). What I think is absolutely terrible is that this disease most often strikes women that are perimenopausal or menopausal so that there are other things happening and the they can't be separated. So it often goes ignored until it's too late to treat effectively. I know I had a lot of trouble getting help but I can't imagine how difficult it would be if I were menopausal. As for the Bushes, they were both elderly when this happened. Since your body doesn't have as many fluctuations when you're elderly, I don't think thyroid deficiency is as hard to fix. Take care, Re: B and Foucault! > , > To see more research dollars put into auto immune disease, and more > knowledge of the thyroid it is going to take several high mucky mucks > getting GD or other AI's and they will have to be treated the same way we > are. > > I can't help but wonder, the Bush's' both have GD, I believe both went > through RAI, what kind of treatment are they getting now that they just act > like everything is hunky-dorry, nothing to it. If they were getting the > same treatment as the rest of us, and feeling like most of us RAIers > do...maybe they could have done something in this area. They are either > getting much better treatment or are lying! > > Same with Gayle Devers...my sister had the opportunity to meet her at the > Nike Indoor Classic last year in Bloomington, Indiana where our son was > running (she lives there and we weren't able to make it) My sister was > telling her I have GD also and Devers told her she was *cured* so my sister > now thinks all of my problems are in my head. I lost a LOT of respect for > Devers since then. > Take care, > Jody > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > ------------------------------------- > The Graves' list is intended for informational purposes only and is not intended to replace expert medical care. > Please consult your doctor before changing or trying new treatments. > ---------------------------------------- > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 7, 2001 Report Share Posted July 7, 2001 I can't help but wonder, the Bush's' both have GD, I believe both went > through RAI, what kind of treatment are they getting now that they just act > like everything is hunky-dorry, nothing to it. If they were getting the > same treatment as the rest of us, and feeling like most of us RAIers > do...maybe they could have done something in this area. They are either > getting much better treatment or are lying! Maybe they're on actual thyroid gland from actual humans. The rich often get organ donations from third world children, you know. I'll bet teenager thyroid would make everyone feel great! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.