Hacker News Reader

Comment by whatever1 | Hacker News Reader

Embryos have to reset after conception to delete all of the faulty dna inherited from the parents. Babies don’t get born with wrinkles for example. They start clean slate without (most) epigenetic damage that both sperm and egg had.

So the embryo a 10 days after conception is not the same thing as at conception. Did God kill it?

View on HN

Do you have more information or citations related to epigenetic damage in the sperm and egg?

A lot of age related dysfunction is systemic as opposed to genetic. Even for the stuff that's (epi)genetic in nature it's important to bear in mind that each cell has its own independent copy.

There is a nice podcast from the NYtimes daily podcast named: “can we reverse aging?” that covers a lot of this.

(Obviously when we discovered the reset mechanism people started asking why we cannot press the reset button at 70yo)

I'm not interested in an arbitrarily open ended reading assignment but rather am asking if you can provide even a vague pointer to evidence of this because it doesn't match my understanding of how these things work.

I know for a fact that epigenetic material isn't magically reset to some prior state in a blanket manner because changes to the epigenome based on the environmental conditions in which the parents are born and raised are heritable by their children. For example widespread famine has been shown to leave changes in the epigenome that remain for at least several generations.

I am not interested in teaching you how to google. I gave you pointers and keywords. Now you have to go read. Good luck.

The trouble with that attitude is that it's much cheaper to make false claims that it is to do the research necessary to debunk them. As a result it isn't reasonable in a context such as HN to expect others to do the work of articulating your own position for you. I provided a concrete example (famine) where the existing literature appears to contradict in broad strokes your original claim.

That's true but demanding full satisfaction can be it's own bad expectation. The respondent spent their time giving you pointers which cost them. Suggesting that because they spent some of their time they are stuck giving you more of their time leads to suppressed sharing. One way to take them is that they were trying to combat you and if their goal was to win in public then they might be beholden. Otherwise they were just trying to share a lead and that was as much as they wanted to engage with what can be an exhausting and motivated line of argument. Especially so in the face of what may have seemed like a demanding response.

The Google which no longer searches for what you ask and instead rephrases your query into meaninglessness and returns irrelevant results? That Google?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com