It Isn’t in Your Genes

Post to Twitter

Once we understand the new science of epigenetics and throw out the story telling us that we are victims of our genes, we then realize that the control is in our “perception”. This shows the role we have played as a victim is gone and we are free to know that there is nothing that is impossible for us to create if we only change our perception. Yes, our perceptions are so powerful that they can change all the combinations of read-outs in our genes.

You may say if this is true, then why do they still try to tell us that our disease or our bodies’ dysfunctions are due to our genes? Bruce Lipton explains it this way in his book The Biology of Belief:

In 1990, under the direction of James Watson, with the interests of the U.S. National Institute of Health (NIH), and an agency of the U.S. Department ODF Health and Human Services, the Human Genome Project (HGP) was birthed. This project had three main objectives which were to create a research database with tools to analyze the data that would be shared with bio-technical industries and the private sector; to identify positive and negative human traits from a genetic base; and to promote and develop new medical applications around the globe.

This sounds good, so what does it really mean? Their thinking was based on faulty assumptions that genes controlled an organism’s traits. (It was bad science to assume anything before it was proven.) Science doesn’t start with an assumption and try to find the elements to fit their presumed hypothesis. That is one of their research rules.

They set out to find one hundred thousand proteins in the human body. With a gene blueprint needed to make each protein, they assumed there should be at least that many genes. Those behind the project set out to make a list, or inventory of all human genes. They could then use that database to engineer a human utopia.

There were other ulterior motives for this project as well. Genetic scientists convinced venture capitalists that a fortune could be made once they identified all one hundred thousand genes. They could patent the nucleotide base sequence for each gene and then sell the information to drug companies who would use them to discover more drugs, make bigger profits and get investors a higher return.

Instead of what they hoped to discover, they found:

The assumption that more complex organisms would possess a greater number of genes (due to more functions involved) was incorrect. They found this out after beginning their study on the genes of the simpler organisms.

Bacteria, the most primitive organism, contain three-thousand to five-thousand genes. The Cenorhabditias elegans, a barely visible round worm made up of 1271 cells had about twenty three thousand genes. So far, the assumptions were not working out.

Next they went to the more complex fruit fly and were surprised in the wrong way. It had only eighteen thousand genes. That begged the question of how a more complex organism have fewer genes than the simple round worm. (That should have caused them to say, “Houston, we have a problem here.”)

When the project was completed and all the results were in, they were staggered by how incorrect their assumptions had been. In other words, if the results of what they were looking for had been intended to solve a problem at NASA, with the lives of astronauts on the line—say to enter the earth’s atmosphere without a hitch—they would be planning funerals instead of having a celebration. In the end, the results of their testing revealed that as biologically complex as we humans are, with our fifty plus trillion cells, we have approximately twenty-three thousand genes—about the same number as the barely visible round worm.

Nevertheless, the results of the project were reported in 2003, and spoken of as if it had been one of humanity’s greatest accomplishments. Dr. Paul Silverman, a pioneer in the research and a principal architect of the project, responded by saying that science needed to rethink the notion of genetic determinism.

Silverman wrote in the magazine called The Scientist May 2004: “The cell signaling process heavily depends on extracellular stimuli to trigger nuclear DNA transduction.” Translated: It isn’t in the genes, it’s in the environment.

I found it fascinating that one gene blueprint can make over two thousand different products. Humans have some twenty three thousand genes. These genes are the building blocks for the human houses you and I create. We are the contractors, choosing which blueprints we read based upon electrical signals of perception from reading our environment.

Read more in Think Well, Live Well Now

We welcome comments below.  Like us on Facebook

Post to Twitter

There are no comments yet. Be the first and leave a response!

Leave a Reply