Lonelygirl15 Forum Index Lonelygirl15
Forum to post messages about Bree and Danielbeast
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

An Proposed Explanation of the Bree Solution
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Lonelygirl15 Forum Index -> Clues and Puzzles
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
TOSG
Devoted Fan


Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 651

PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemedigod wrote:
Nice job TOSG, Marla, Kelly.

The part I'm unsure of is how will they isolate the ribozyme from the blood? A blood sample will have plenty of RNA molecules unrelated to this ribozyme, so they need to be able to distinguish the correct RNAs from all the other naturally occurring molecules. So we need other information (possibly in the papers from Dr. Gilman?) that gives us either some actual sequence information for the ribozyme, or tells us what its biochemical activity is.


Quite true. But given Isaac Gilman's previous data regarding active ribozyme levels in Bree's bloodstream, it looks like he already has developed some way to isolate and quantify the ribozyme.
_________________
I'm canon; the Creators just don't know it yet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
robtomorrow
Devoted Fan


Joined: 25 Sep 2006
Posts: 849
Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 7:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have a question. Why is it that only teen girls and twenty something girls are trait positive, assuming Kate Modern is trait positive? Spenser has already set us straight as to whether "purity bonds" are important or not. Why not women in their 30's or 40's or even men.

I kind of know the answer, but the answer that I am thinking of is OOC.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aponi
Devoted Fan


Joined: 26 Apr 2007
Posts: 545
Location: New York

PostPosted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 9:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

robtomorrow wrote:
I have a question. Why is it that only teen girls and twenty something girls are trait positive, assuming Kate Modern is trait positive? Spenser has already set us straight as to whether "purity bonds" are important or not. Why not women in their 30's or 40's or even men.

I kind of know the answer, but the answer that I am thinking of is OOC.


Considering Bree has a mutation in her ribozyme and this happens only rarely, there's probably been few previous trait positive people. Even less considering they have to be in the Hoo to get thier blood tested. Other people could be and not know.

That said, apperently this trait postive thing is like winning the HoO lottery and you get featured in the special 'ceremony'...and...well I think the outcome is pretty bleak to say the least.
_________________
The names Julie.
Bree and Jonas Forever! <3
Grand Master of Praise of the SSJF but Shhh about it 'k? XD
My LG15 Vid
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marlasinger
Devoted Fan


Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 736
Location: The 8th Dimension

PostPosted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think it has much to do with age, trait wise. But indoctrinating and preparing a young woman looks like it could be easier at a young age than an older age. Yes?

I think the age might be a psychological factor as opposed to a genetic factor.
_________________
my love tastes a lot like tofu.

The Bree Solution.
http://one.revver.com/watch/330795

"Also... im in ur canons... supporting all ur marlas."
-AutoPilate
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
TOSG
Devoted Fan


Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 651

PostPosted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

marlasinger wrote:
I don't think it has much to do with age, trait wise. But indoctrinating and preparing a young woman looks like it could be easier at a young age than an older age. Yes?

I think the age might be a psychological factor as opposed to a genetic factor.


Agreed.
_________________
I'm canon; the Creators just don't know it yet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fan
Suspiciously Absent


Joined: 20 Nov 2006
Posts: 25

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TOSG wrote:
fan wrote:
I think you're trying to describe RNAi for some sci-fi application.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA_interference


It's not RNAi. RNAi involves uptake of double-stranded RNA, and the subsequent cellular destruction of the gene that codes for that RNA, as a result.

This simply suggests that the single-stranded complementary strand is being injected, and binding to (and inactivating) the active ribozyme.

I've got to run, but I can elaborate on this later if people are still unclear.


From my understanding of cell bio, RNAi silences genes- it doesn't destroy - or even have anything to do with - DNA. You use a segment of RNA that you take from a double-stranded RNA (a sample you already have) and use it sort of like an antibody for RNA segments. When it binds, it blocks that section RNA, preventing transcription and silencing the gene. The gene on the DNA is still being transcribed from DNA to RNA- it is present, but not expressed. I really don't think we will ever play around with destroying genes since genes overlap and have many different functions. Maybe someone else is familiar with the idea, but I still think we're describing the same thing. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TOSG
Devoted Fan


Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 651

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 8:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

fan wrote:
TOSG wrote:
fan wrote:
I think you're trying to describe RNAi for some sci-fi application.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA_interference


It's not RNAi. RNAi involves uptake of double-stranded RNA, and the subsequent cellular destruction of the gene that codes for that RNA, as a result.

This simply suggests that the single-stranded complementary strand is being injected, and binding to (and inactivating) the active ribozyme.

I've got to run, but I can elaborate on this later if people are still unclear.


From my understanding of cell bio, RNAi silences genes- it doesn't destroy - or even have anything to do with - DNA. You use a segment of RNA that you take from a double-stranded RNA (a sample you already have) and use it sort of like an antibody for RNA segments. When it binds, it blocks that section RNA, preventing transcription and silencing the gene. The gene on the DNA is still being transcribed from DNA to RNA- it is present, but not expressed. I really don't think we will ever play around with destroying genes since genes overlap and have many different functions. Maybe someone else is familiar with the idea, but I still think we're describing the same thing. Smile


Yeah, sorry, I was a little bit off in my understanding of RNAi. You're right that it doesn't destroy the gene. Rather, it binds to mRNA transcripts of the gene, signaling for their destruction and thereby silencing the gene.

But it's not just a matter of blocking the mRNA - it actually signals for its destruction.

What I am describing here is more like how an inhibitor works on an enzyme, only the "enzyme" is the active strand (Bree's ribozyme), and the "inhibitor" is the complementary strand.

So, sorry for any confusion. Does what I'm saying make more sense now?
_________________
I'm canon; the Creators just don't know it yet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
robtomorrow
Devoted Fan


Joined: 25 Sep 2006
Posts: 849
Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TOSG wrote:
What I am describing here is more like how an inhibitor works on an enzyme, only the "enzyme" is the active strand (Bree's ribozyme), and the is the complementary strand.


This wouldn't be a permanent solution would it? If they stopped injecting her with the "inhibitor" she would be the same as she was before, so she would still be "trait positive". If the Order already knows she is trait positive it wouldn't fool anyone.

What happened to flychiqk? I was hoping that she would be around to tell us if this biotech stuff makes any sense, but she hasn't posted for almost a month. Sad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TOSG
Devoted Fan


Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 651

PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2007 12:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

robtomorrow wrote:
TOSG wrote:
What I am describing here is more like how an inhibitor works on an enzyme, only the "enzyme" is the active strand (Bree's ribozyme), and the is the complementary strand.


This wouldn't be a permanent solution would it? If they stopped injecting her with the "inhibitor" she would be the same as she was before, so she would still be "trait positive". If the Order already knows she is trait positive it wouldn't fool anyone.


You're right that it would likely not be permanent. It could be long-term, though, or easily sustainable with "booster shots."

It all comes down to what they need Bree and/or her ribozymes for. If all they needed was the gene, they would have simply taken a blood sample and be done with it.
_________________
I'm canon; the Creators just don't know it yet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Lonelygirl15 Forum Index -> Clues and Puzzles All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Protected by Anti-Spam ACP