Mad Cow-Like Prion Disease - Human-to-Human Transmission

originally posted by: soficrow
a reply to: Bedlam

Seems more mutagenic than epigenetic.

Erm. No. The DNA is not changed, only the protein, so it's not mutagenic.

Most of the HSP pathways enhance the likelihood of DNA changes. Which actually makes sense.

...any protein can misfold in myriad ways and at least hypothetically, become infectious. fyi - much prion formation occurs in the body and is not introduced from external sources.

That's why you have chaperones. It's a coin toss how some proteins will fold.

a reply to: Bedlam

Yes - but the mechanisms are still epigenetic, not genetic. Although evidence suggests successful epigenetic changes can become permanent (genetic) over time if the environmental changes persist. Cool system, yes?

a reply to: Bedlam

Just realized you equate epigenetic with genetic. The process and mechanisms are different - epigenetic/environmental mechanisms control DNA. Some of these mechanisms involve RNA, but not all.

a reply to: soficrow

I know I'm late to the party on this thread, but if you are concerned about prions and/or interested in prion diseases, I recommend reading this book.

It explains the history of discovering prions and how they work, as well as what they are capable of. One thing that particularly struck me was a description of H2H transmission. A woman with a neurological disease caused by prions (I don't remember which specifically) was sent to the hospital for testing. They inserted probes into her brain as part of their testing/treatments. Years later, these same probes were used in the brains of two other people who had different issues. Both contracted that woman's disease and died from it. The prions clung to the probes and were viable even after years lying dormant, and going through regulation sterilization.

The scary thing about prions is that they're incredibly resilient and you don't show symptoms until years after you've contracted the disease--sometimes decades later.

Definitely worth reading Fatal Flaws.

a reply to: Alexithymia

Thanks.

...I am not "concerned" about prions - just intrigued. But as it happens, I find Jay Ingram's take to be seriously incomplete, flawed and finally, inaccurate.

a reply to: soficrow

I'd love for you to explain everything you find wrong with his novel. I read it out loud for someone, and it's really the only literature on prions I've read, as I did not find it out of interest. But I would very much appreciate hearing more on the subject from someone with more authority on the matter, as it is rather fascinating. Cheers

a reply to: Alexithymia

Yes - prions are fascinating. My issue with Ingram is that he maintains the fiction that the brain protein named 'prion' is the only infectious misfolded protein. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

When Prusiner brought prions into the limelight (he didn't really "discover" them), it already was recognized that virtually any protein could misfold and become infectious - and the very name highlighted that fact. "Prion" stands for "proteinaceous infectious particles." However, for various political and economic reasons, a single protein in the brain was re-named "the prion protein" (shortly after Prusiner received his Nobel prize), and most fruitful discussion and research into prions was effectively quashed.

Fortunately, despite considerable effort to "contain" peoples' awareness of prions, it now is clear that prions are an epigenetic mechanism - and play an essential role in evolution. This is what interests me.

Ingram's inaccurate descriptions are ridiculously simplistic, serve mainly to support the disinformation campaign - and incidentally, protect industry from the threat of liability.