APP - Identical Twins, One Gay, One Ain't

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080215121214.htm

"Contrary to our previous beliefs, identical twins are not genetically identical. This surprising finding may be of great significance for research on hereditary diseases and for the development of new diagnostic methods."

"The researchers studied 19 pairs of monozygotic, or identical, twins and found differences in copy number variation in DNA. Copy number variation (CNV) occurs when a set of coding letters in DNA are missing, or when extra copies of segments of DNA are produced."

"Humans receive one chromosome from their mother and one from their father, providing for two copies of the genome. In some cases, bits of DNA are missing from a chromosome, leaving the offspring with just one copy of that bit of DNA."

"Researchers at UAB( University of Alabama), Leiden University Medical Center and VU University, The Netherlands; and Uppsala University and Karolinska Institutet, Sweden recently published their findings.*

“The presumption has always been that identical twins are identical down to their DNA,” said Carl Bruder, Ph.D. and Jan Dumanski, Ph.D., of UAB’s Department of Genetics and the study’s lead authors. “That’s mostly true, but our findings suggest that there are small, subtle differences due to CNV."





So much for the "Identical Twin Theory". Ample medical evidence exists of differences, even in identical twins. If fingerprints are enough,there is research to show dna may be subtly different.
 
Damn Yankee, why are gay people a concern to you? Are you afraid of something in yourself? Since you are among the naive who believe gay is a choice, why not give it a shot? No need to go all the way just look at him in a whole new way, you may learn in that way since knowledge comes so slow otherwise.
 
Damn Yankee, why are gay people a concern to you? Are you afraid of something in yourself? Since you are among the naive who believe gay is a choice, why not give it a shot? No need to go all the way just look at him in a whole new way, you may learn in that way since knowledge comes so slow otherwise.
I will remind you that this is the APP portion of the forum. :)
 
In most cases, variation in the number of copies likely has no impact on health or development. But in others, it may be one factor in the likelihood of developing a disease.

So its a disease.
 
So its a disease.

No, that is not what the article stated. It stated that there can be differences in the dna of identical twins. This may explain why one twin has a genetically based disorder and one does not. The difference itself is not a disease.
 
I didn't see it called a disorder either.

But I did see medical research showing that the dna of identical twins is not always 100% identical.

You are wanting to apply hard standards to biology. It rarely works like that.
 
Mutation isn't a negative label. Is it a mutation or not?

I didn't see it called a mutation. It could be just a variation.

The point is, identical twins do not always have identical dna. So your theory is invalid.
 
The article you posted called it a mutation: " ...mutations may produce three, four or more copies of a particular bit of DNA."

The article that I posted said they have the same DNA, so its not "my theory".

Funny how your reading ability declines to fit your positions.
 
Back
Top