What is Digg?Sponsored by Honda
Dreaming=Thinking In a Very Different Biochemical State view!
dreams.honda.com - Visionary authors and scientists explore the role of the unconscious mind in creative breakthroughs.
41 Comments
- lamuella, on 10/12/2007, -4/+32depends how you define "human", really. It would be hard to find creatures more "human" than us. And i think it was common knowledge that people are walking bacteria colonies.
- boycy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26I agree, what an absolutely stupid thing to say. The word 'human' is defined by what we as a race are. If we as a race are symbiotic creatures relying on bacteria for some of our biological processes, then that is what being human is.
- Tyrekicker, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24Um.. 'Human' is just a word. A word we use to define our species, or at least our 'kind'.
So if our bodies contain a percentage of bacteria, and if everyone had it, would that not then be considered part of being 'human'?
In my opinion, a theory like this does not distance us in any way from being 100% human, but rather changes what it is to be human in the first place. - shinynew, on 10/12/2007, -6/+21OH THE HUMANITY!
- theHM, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14I think the phrase "We are not entirely human" was meant to be read as "Our bodies consist not just of human cells", which -- although correct -- is pretty damn obvious.
- djhash, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10i think you mean.. Oh the Bacteria-ity!!!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10"There are some estimates that say 90 percent of the cells on our body are actually bacteria," Steven Gill, a molecular biologist formerly at TIGR and now at the State University of New York in Buffalo, said in a telephone interview.
That's not common knowledge.
THIS JUST IN: In the dark, cave ecosystem of my gut, most of the life forms studied were found to have no eyes, and there were over 10 dead crustaceans. Fascinating, and we're hoping not to find any live crustaceans in the future. - Quactaur, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8By "not human" it means genetically: meaning that our genes alone will not be enough to keep us alive and we *must* have other organisms working with us to survive.
In all honesty this isn't new information, mitochondria, the little organelles which let us convert sugars into energy are bacteria which have become permanent residents of our cells: they have their own dna, and cannot be produced in the body; they are carried on from mother to child in the egg.
The theory is that the predecessor of respiring organisms (i.e. almost all of them) picked up mitochondria and kept them as they were far more efficient than fermentation or other anaerobic ways of extracting energy. :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrion#Origin - chad78, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12So does that mean if I pick up a dog that weighs 1/9 as much as me that I become 1/10 dog? What if I swallow a bug - does that make me part housefly? Or after I eat steak and it's still in my stomach - I guess I'm part cow then, huh? This headline is totally misleading.
- somerandomnerd, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Clearly, if you strip the human body of anything that doesn't carry "your" DNA, it will die. We're symbiotic creatures. But only on a cellular, microscopic scale- on a large scale, we're very clearly parasites.
- Gabskij, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7@GarethSaxby:
No Human is not derived from ***** Sapiens so assuming that everyone knows this is quite poor style. Human comes from the Latin word Humanus. - somerandomnerd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I think I'm mainly water.
- GarethSaxby, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8The word "Human", as most people should know, is derived from the term "***** Sapien". Even if this is a rather tenuous link in terms of phonology, it's very much true in the fact that the implied meaning is identical, making the two pseudonyms of each other. However, the definition of ***** Sapien is "Knowing Man", and we use this principle, the idea of the Human race being more knowledgable than other animals, in order to define ourselves from the rest of the animals.
- detonate, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9We have a lot to learn about the human body. The overuse of antibiotics and other unnatural dietary habits (e.g. excess sugar consumption) are putting us at unknown risk. Commensal bacteria live not only in the gut, but on almost every body surface (e.g. on the surface of the eye). Until we know more about the long term effects of killing these off, maybe antibiotics should be reserved for more serious conditions.
- gregorrothfuss, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5people need to learn to link to the printer-friendly version.
http://today.reuters.com/misc/printerFriendlyPopup.aspx?type=scienceNews&storyID=2006-06-01T181339Z_01_N01206758_RTRUKOC_0_US-BACTERIA.xml - szelij, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6I agree with it. We are symbiotic but it isn't readily apparent unless we look for it. So by definition-yes we humans are symbiotic creatures...
- allisonaxe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3is god made up of humans? absolutely!
or rather, god is made up *by* humans. - chrizzler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The actual theory:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endosymbiotic_theory - zubi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5It might be obvious. But I havent really thought about about it like this. I found the article very interesting.
- Amaguq, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Soylent Deity?
- Kamikid, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Thats just the thing. Everything rely's on everything else for it's survival. And I bet in some sick way the earth is dependant upon US for it's survival, just as the bacteria in our guts.
- warmonger48, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2If we were created in the image of god then is god made up of humans??? Food for thought....
- Jugalator, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5"Human" is used in far less scientific contexts than the word for the actual species though, and one can use the word as the adjective, not the noun. Then it can just as well mean "characteristic of humanity", and then I wouldn't say this reasoning is too wrong here, because the accuracy would depend on what you call characteristic of humanity. These bacteria in our bodies could be, for example.
"and we use this principle, the idea of the Human race being more knowledgable than other animals, in order to define ourselves from the rest of the animals."
"we" do? I thought it was just to differentiate the species from the former ones of the same genus, e.g ***** erectus, not specifically to define ourselves from the rest of the animals. But of course, one can say our species makes us different from the rest of the animals. Just like "canis lupus" is differentiated from "ursus arctos" and all the other species. :-) - boycy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@Quactaur Thanks for that - I never knew that's where Mitochondria came from. Was always a bit of a mystery to me, as was the 'mitochondrial DNA only coming from your mother'.
:D - pauldonnelly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"I hope you meant species when you said race."
He was probably referring to "The Human Race." - tibby.dude, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Well this is nothing new really ... it is well known that we contain certain gene codings in our genome that has their origins from viruses.
One of these for example allowed primates to develop the essential mechanisms for having a placenta.
We are indeed part human and part virus
See this excellent article below
http://loom.corante.com/archives/2005/09/15/part_human_part_virus.php - CompIsMyRx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1When is a human not human?
- somerandomnerd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Lots of the DNA in the feces came from bacteria != lots of bacteria was in the *****
- bdwoolman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Not entirely human. Hmmm. If you had my friends you would know that this is old news. Seriously. Eat your yogurt boys and girls, got to keep those lacto bacteria in fine fettle or you will get kicked out of bed.
- computerdude33, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Vogonity...
- nigel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1How can this be true? Jesus said that I was a pure and unique snowflake just like him.
- templest, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Let me debunk this sensationalist title with some good ol' "Philosophy":
If, by definition, none of us are human-- yet we all pertain to the same species, and we've given
ourselves this name, are we not still "human"? When we called ourselves thus, we never took
into account the chemical or biological composition of the body, we were just referring to the species
in general, it could be argued. Thusly, if one day we evolved into cold-blooded reptiles with wings
that could talk, it can be said we'd still be human.
Besides, this is what Princeton has to say about the definition of the word "human":
# characteristic of humanity; "human nature"
# relating to a person; "the experiment was conducted on 6 monkeys and 2 human subjects"
# *****: any living or extinct member of the family Hominidae characterized by superior intelligence, articulate speech, and erect carriage
# having human form or attributes as opposed to those of animals or divine beings; "human beings"; "the human body"; "human kindness"; "human frailty"
All of those definitions are still relevant to us, therefore, we're still human.
We've always known to have bacteria in our bodies, nothing new.
Chill; and read the article. It's quite interesting. - dogside, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Lets just hope those mitochondria stay inside our cells, I would rather not expirience a mitochondrion eve. *Parasite Eve Rocks*
- zedj, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0"Gill and his team sequenced the DNA in feces donated by three adults. They found a surprising amount of it came from bacteria."
Feces as in *****? Of course there will be lots of bacteria. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+6I always thought i was an alien.
- KineticFlow, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4Especially after playing Tremulous, I feel like I'm alien.
- regeya, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0Dumb Headlines On The Rise, Experts Say
- sogracefully, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4i kinda suspected that either i am not entirely human, or it's pretty much everyone else.
- jmsanzg, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3And some privileged ones also have midichlorian inside them like Anakin...
- badave, on 10/12/2007, -11/+5I hope you meant species when you said race.
- pairanoyd, on 10/12/2007, -10/+1uh oh.. The fundies are going to go ***** over this..
