If I'm a young player coming into the league today, I would really focus on the defensive end of the floor and look at Scottie Pippen.
I mean, this guy was a genius.
His ball pressure, playing passing lanes, blocking shots, taking charges, and he played with a passion on the defensive end of the floor like, no, this is the most exciting part of the game to me.
All right, so here again, Scottie's initiating the action.
He's making Mark work to bring the ball up the floor.
Okay, that's one.
Now, where he's pushing him, he's pushing him into situations where Mark can't really attack.
Right here, you got Michael sitting here waiting, right?
That area's clogged up.
There's nowhere for him to go.
Scotty's fully aware of that, so he knows he can put a lot of pressure on him in these areas, because there's nowhere for him to drive.
So now, where is Mark looking, right?
He's looking for these curl actions here.
Yeah, he couldn't run the play, right?
Scotty took the play away from him.
Here, he cuts the angle off.
Now Mark says, okay, I gotta attack him.
He's bodying up on me, I'm gonna attack him.
Mark attacks him here.
But now Scotty, you know, sensing that Mark wants to feel the contact, right?
Cause Scotty's been bodying him this whole time.
So now Mark seeks the contact and Scotty just backs up.
Scotty just backs up.
I mean, that's just brilliant defense.
I mean, think about that for a second.
I mean, he's bodying Mark the whole game.
Body him, body him, body him.
Now Mark's looking for Scotty's body and Scotty just moves back and lets Mark lose his balance.
That's a game of cat and mouse right there.
Okay, again, you know, Scotty's making the reads.
He knows this action.
He knows it.
Here it is.
He knows the ball comes back there.
He knows they're looking for Starks coming off of a double screen on the weak side.
So he tries to get his hand in that passing lane.
He misses it.
But this shows me that he is keenly aware of the actions that are taking place out here on the floor, which means he prepares.
So if I'm this draft pick coming into the league, I know I got to do my homework.
Homework could give you all the answers, right?
Scotty knows what's coming there.
Right now, this is unbelievable.
Look at all the ground this guy covers.
Here, down, there.
This is the activity.
He plays defense with an energy.
Too many players today play defense just to play defense.
He's attacking these offensive players.
He's going after it.
He's playing with an energy out there.
If I can learn how to cut angles off like Scottie, be aggressive on a defensive end the floor like Scottie, I think they'll just take my game and the team that drafts me to an entirely different level.
For more analysis, go to detail on ESPN+.
you you
Let me see if I can fix that audio for everyone.
Good morning.
My name is Jonathan Cooey.
I am a chief biologist at GigaOM Biological, coming to you live from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
You can figure out who I am because I am on the internet as that name.
Welcome to the show.
Today we are going to work on Biology 101, which is not really the same normal show that I do.
um we are gonna try and start a new thing and uh if i might admit it it's a it's a big
It's a big thing to start a new thing.
And so it is with great trepidation that I am starting the new Biology 101 and going to try and get everybody to understand what I'm trying to mean with a pattern integrity across time, a trajectory across time.
I think biology is definitely the way out, but it's a new biology we're going to need.
This is a new biology 101 journal club.
So we are actually going to, we have a paper up on this up on the website in the in the link called stuff.
So if you go to gigaohmbiological.com, and you look up at the links on the top, the farthest one to the right, or
If you're using a pull-down menu because your screen's too small or because you're on your phone, then it will be the last thing in the menu, which is titled Stuff.
And actually, this link is also on the bottom of every page.
And so when you click on Stuff, you'll see the things that we've been working on from the Biology 101 texts to some legal stuff to read.
There's also the Journal Club from today, which is the
Sorry, I might have my ears a little high and maybe that's why my voice is a little low.
I'll try to kick it up a little bit here.
This is the same message, but it's the other side of it, right?
In my normal work or the work that I have been trapped into doing, I feel is necessary to do.
The message is that this is for all the marbles, this is for the grandchildren of Earth, and that actually a large swath of the thinking American public is in one way or another under the spell of an anti-vaccine movement that's actually fake.
And it is part and parcel for the same kind of governance theater that we typically think of happening only on news programs and only on Fox News or only on MSNBC.
But actually, this fake anti-vaccine movement is crucial.
Um, for this, this, this thing to have happened.
Um, and, and I, I think it's really important to understand that's why I'm going to continue to do shows, um, which will explain how these murder and lies, um, were committed, how this, you know, pre existing anticipated rise in all cause mortality was used.
to create a mythology that they intend to enslave our children with.
And so I think in my other streams, I have tried very hard to, let me add this over here.
I have tried very hard.
That's still not really adding anything there.
Ooh, let me get this over here.
Yes, that's that one.
And this is that one.
And then I could also probably do this.
RNA cannot pandemic.
Using intramuscular injection to administer medicine to healthy people is wrong.
And that is something that I think the new biology 101 should provide the model that in theory edifies that idea.
If intramuscular injection is a very, very ridiculous way to administer medicine, that it's essentially like hitting someone in the head with a baseball bat, especially children, then there should be a pretty easy way to explain
a model of biology wherein that statement makes sense.
Because right now, our model of biology that includes viruses and vaccines and public health and quarantine and vaccines for the young and the old and for the middle-aged, these things don't work there.
In fact, the main presumption is that intramuscular injection is one of the best ways to administer medicine.
And so this final statement, the Human Genome Project has just begun, I think that's also something that if there is a new Biology 101 to teach, at the foundation of it should be this concept that the Human Genome Project isn't a milestone that was hit, it was a milestone that was defined.
and maybe not even defined but sort of codified or conceived and conceptualized and laid out as a plan when the Human Genome Project was said or declared to be done on the cover of Nature in early 2000s.
Now, in order to make the progress that we need to make, I guess I must have clicked something over here.
We need to get rid of this bad biology 101, which is again, at the heart of this, this background that has been misconstrued as a spread and a novel virus and the need for lockdowns and masks and, and a, a group of people on white horses to come and save us.
This bad biology 101 is all at the foundation of that.
And one way to think about biology 101 in the simplest terms possible is that evolution because DNA.
If I expand that a little bit more, evolution and the whole idea
that we are the emergent properties of physics and chemistry with a little lightning and a mud puddle and lots and lots and lots and lots of time and solar energy, we are in existence.
And it is despite all of the forces in nature which would work against the ever increasing complexity
over billions of years that apparently because we found DNA is absolutely sure to be true.
That's really the essence of this Bad Biology 101 because all of those assumptions are taught in those books.
When you're taught as a biologist, or a budding biology student in high school, and then when you're taught again in college, you are essentially taught twice the same thing, one time, the second time in more detail, that evolution, because DNA.
That's where you get.
That's the end of biology 101.
If you understand that evolution is real and the main evidence we have for it is DNA and genes, then you understand biology 101.
You're ready to be indoctrinated into everything else.
And so I think that that was part of the reason why the murder and lies were possible and why it was possible for this data to be available
this data to be available, but no one to be able to see it.
We lost control of pneumonia.
How the hell did we do that?
And the reason why people couldn't see it is because of this Biology 101 is so bad.
Everyone's Biology 101 is so bad that
dumb, simple explanations or stupid, complicated explanations can be used and weaponized against people and children can be bamboozled and their parents can be lied to.
And so the way we get out of it is a new Biology 101 where people and kids, more importantly, really understand life as a pattern integrity with a trajectory across time.
Once children are growing up with that model of themselves in their head, they will see themselves as sacred enough and that trajectory to be sacred enough to be afraid to perturb it.
And instead they will spend their entire lives exploring ways to optimize it.
Because that's what our kids should be looking to do from the moment that they grow up until the moment they blossom into puberty until the moment that we can declare them adults.
They should have been actively seeking ways to optimize their trajectory across time.
And if we taught children how to think of themselves, their bodies, and their minds as a pattern integrity with a trajectory across time that they can contribute to, that they can nurture, that they can optimize, we're going to end up with teenagers that are beautifully in shape, with a wide variety of skills and interests.
We're not going to end up with a bunch of teenagers on phones all sharing Snapchat videos.
That's my vision for high school kids that understand themselves and understand what responsibility comes along with that tremendous opportunity to optimize their trajectory across time, to enhance it.
And so that's what I think a biology coach can do.
I think we can think our way out.
We can think, everybody can think their way out of this.
In the end, it's not going to be my idea.
It's never my, there's books all over the place in this room that every time I open them, I'm thinking, wow, how in the world have I heard this before?
And none of the ideas that I'm going to present to you over the next few weeks are mine.
A lot of them come crazy enough from Joshua Lederberg.
And that didn't work the way that I wanted it to.
Darn it.
What happened here?
This was supposed to have an animation.
Darn it.
Why did that not work?
Let me just fix this.
Sorry.
I want to be able to do this right.
And this will be a useful slide anyway later.
Ctrl-Z.
Hey, let's see how fast I can do things in PowerPoint.
Why didn't that do that?
I thought I sent that up already.
That's weird.
I must have done that with this one then.
No, that one's also not there.
Okay, well, I got to do this one then too.
I'll just do it right away so that it's done.
From the left, click.
There we go.
Okay, so let's start here again.
So what I want to do is help you think your way out.
I want to teach people how to teach their kids how to think their way out.
And more importantly, I want to teach parents how to teach their kids to think about themselves.
And I think, you know, even think about this in the 90s.
when they were telling us your brain on drugs and then they were frying an egg in a pan.
What if they just told you that your body and your mind is a pattern integrity with a trajectory across time.
And so it's, you're kind of obligated to wait until most of that trajectory and direction is determined before you start fooling around with things.
And then maybe you can fool around with things, who knows?
But if you just told people the truth,
about the potential dangers of disrupting a trajectory across time.
Then children would grow up respecting themselves and their bodies in a very different way, right?
I mean, do you see my point?
And so Bad Biology 101, this evolution because DNA has a few things at its center that everybody needs to understand.
First of all, DNA equals genes.
Okay, I gotta move this over a little bit, I apologize.
There we go.
So DNA equals genes, this is already something that we, Mark Kulak and others that are helping us work through this have seen the transition happen because it was already set up.
So they were already thinking about the concept of genes and inheritance and a unit of inheritance already before the molecule of DNA was discovered.
And the discovery of DNA meant to these people that their concept of genes and inheritance of bits of information and then the random mutation of those bits of information being the substrate for evolution.
Do you see?
This is important.
Because evolution, because DNA, is a really important thing to understand.
If we're gonna go forward with the new biology 101, you need to see how bad the bad biology 101 really is.
If evolution, because DNA equals genes, which means that already, and think about how magic this is with six words.
If you count DNA as a word, with six words I'm already able to explain to you the enchantment because built in here is the assumption that the discovery of DNA means evolution by mutation of genes is real.
It explains everything.
That's why we're here.
That's why we're surrounded by bugs.
That's why we all have DNA.
That's it.
That's their answer.
And if that's wrong, think about how much sacred biology just goes poof.
And think about how hard it is for your children to think of themselves and understand the responsibility and the opportunity they've been given by their creator if you start with this bad biology.
The second thing is that genes cause disease.
That's of course what all these people are talking about when they say that we've got to screen 100,000 genomes because I'm a clinical pathologist and I want to figure out how diseases occur, like, you know, Alzheimer's and stuff.
They want to talk about genes causing disease near the end of the trajectory through time.
They want to talk about cancer being caused by genes when it happens at the end of a trajectory across time.
Think about how absurd it is that that is also part of bad biology 101.
That's how people think on TV and social media.
That's how they argue with that assumption.
Genes create potential.
So it doesn't mean that if you have the gene, you're going to get the disease because it's a whole selection of genes that work together.
And so the best we can do is correlate these individual digits with the disease.
This is as far as we are because again, evolution, because DNA, they're kind of trapped.
They're kind of trapped with that explanation.
They're kind of trapped with those questions.
And genes are the nature of nature versus nurture.
Now, nature versus nurture is a very old, almost passé argument at this point.
I don't even know if Kevin McKernan is old enough to have ever even heard this argument before.
But nature versus nurture is this idea that your genes or your heredity contributes something to the adult animal
and also the nature, the nurture, so the environment and for your parents and what happens to you and the chemicals you're surrounded by during development.
And of course, nature versus nurture is not very far off from the idea of a pattern integrity with a trajectory across time.
It's essentially arguing and discussing the importance of nature being genes
versus nurture being the environment, you know, like your parents and the food you eat and blah, blah, blah, blah.
Okay, so this is where we are with Biology 101.
If you get that, then basically you got the whole first year of biology in a nutshell.
First high school year for sure.
I did get the email about the car guy.
That's something I'm going to look into later this afternoon, actually.
Thank you very much.
So, I guess the alternative question then would be for the biology coach, what is a pattern integrity with a trajectory across time?
So, let me just give you a couple ideas of where I want to take this.
But first, just to remind you that the TV is out there.
The beekeeping industry is in crisis over the shocking and unexplained deaths of hundreds of millions of bees over the last eight months.
It could impact all of us, as bees, called the backbone of agriculture, are responsible for pollinating more than a third of the nation's crops, and current losses are unsustainable.
Janet Chamleon has more on this stinging decline.
Stinging decline.
This is what an unfolding disaster looks like in the U.S.
beekeeping industry.
Each of these hives can hold as many as 80,000 bees, but for reasons no one can pinpoint, the bees in all these hives and tens of thousands more have turned up dead.
Have you ever seen it this bad?
Never, not even close.
The data is showing us that this is the worst bee loss in recorded history.
Blake Shook is one of the nation's top beekeepers.
He owns Desert Creek Honey and several other beekeeping businesses.
One of them is rebuilding dead hives and he's receiving an alarming number of them.
Where are they from?
Yeah, these are from North Dakota that we're looking at right here.
Over there we've got Florida, back here we've got Georgia, I've got California over in that corner.
Bees play a critical role in U.S.
food production.
In addition to making honey, they pollinate 75% of the fruits, nuts, and vegetables grown in the U.S.
That's $15 billion worth of crops.
If this is a multi-year thing, it'll change the way we consume food in the United States.
That's a pretty significant statement.
It's huge.
I mean, if we lose 80% of our bees every year, the industry cannot survive, which means we cannot pollinate at the scale that we need to produce food in the United States.
So what's causing the deaths, and why now?
So these are dead bees in there, and they have always an identifier for a project.
Juliana Rangel is an entomologist at Texas A&M University.
She showed us the lab where they've been studying the bees.
One potential explanation is that over the last few years, we've seen some locations across the U.S.
that have had lower forage available for bees.
So when they're supposed to be blooming, let's say in April, they're blooming either earlier in the year or later in the year.
And so we have these food deserts, basically, in the summer and fall that the bees sometimes cannot withstand.
Back at Shook's Bee Farm... Here we go with the hood.
We suited up for a look at his commercial operation.
Okay, you ready?
Yep.
Alright, the first thing we do is smoke the entrance and that calms the bees down.
This is what a healthy hive looks like.
And then in the center here, this is where the baby bees are raised.
These just returned from California, where the bees were used to pollinate almonds.
Why are honeybees so essential to pollinating the almond crops?
With honeybees, almonds produce 2,000 to 3,000 pounds per acre.
Without bees, they produce 200 pounds per acre.
So there is no almond crop without honeybees.
Beekeeping groups say the losses may put as many as 25% of commercial operations out of business by year's end, with wide-reaching impact.
I got a call from a friend who has 20,000 beehives at the start of winter, and he's at less than 1,000.
And he said, this is it.
And this guy's just collecting their beehives and he's going to rebuild them here and he's got a big factory that's packaging honey.
So I'm not really sure what's going on.
Anyway, the point is, is that the bees are collapsing.
We heard this a few years ago, too.
And they don't really have an explanation.
Her explanation, which was something about there being food deserts or something like that.
I, I'm not buying that one because they're also talking about pollinating food crops.
And in those cases, a lot of times the bees are moved.
So I'm, I'm still not buying it anyway.
I'm going to resume the show and show you that it's also on, you know, they're, they're bombarding everybody with it.
It's on the Saturday morning show.
It's on the afternoon news.
and the evening weekend news.
Tonight, the beekeeping industry is in crisis over the shocking and unexplained deaths of hundreds of millions of bees over the last eight months.
Now, this could impact all of the U.S., as bees, called the backbone of agriculture, are responsible for pollinating, get this, more than a third of the nation's crops.
CBS's Janet Shamlian in Savoy, Texas, has the story.
This is what an unfolding disaster looks like in the U.S.
beekeeping industry.
Each of these hives can hold as many as 80,000.
Now you can see right there, basically recycling the same thing over and over again on the news.
And you got to ask yourself, why?
Is it really because the bees are going away?
Or is it because of something bigger, something more interesting?
And that's what I just want to seed in this little thing.
Remember what I said, maybe I should show you that.
Maybe I'm just going to escape here for a second.
Fire this up and go to GigaOM at home here.
Bring this over this way and show you.
OK, look, here's the home site, GigaOMBiological.com.
And if you go to stuff right here, can you see that finger you push to stuff?
And then here's the journal club.
We're going to talk about this bee microbe review and this rhizophagy review tomorrow as two examples of the kind of thing that are, I think, kind of the unifying phenomenon in a new biology 101.
I'm nervous about this, you know?
I'm nervous about this because
You know, maybe if it's a good enough idea, people will even want to, you know, try to pretend it was theirs.
But I think this is...
This idea and these ideas belong to Joshua Lederberg and Buckminster Fuller.
And there's just too many people that came before me that have made it possible for me to even arrive at these ideas.
And I'm really excited just to share them with you after having them in the background for so long and not really understanding how I was going to get them out.
Just be sure you understand this Twitch video is going to disappear immediately and the YouTube video is going to go private immediately.
This will only remain in Biology 101 on PeerTube.
So the important thing, I think, to understand with regard to what is, there's the question up on top, right?
What is a pattern integrity with the trajectory across time?
If we're going to explain this to our kids, we're going to have to give them the tools to understand it.
And in old
beat.
old bad biology 101 we talk about things like development and development is this trajectory across time.
The annoying part of development is that it kind of starts and stops and it's supposed to have different steps in it and some of that is embryological and so it was just an imperfect word that brought about a lot of imperfect concepts and an imperfect idea because it sort of had a beginning and an end that didn't
sort of coincide with the animal, and that's a little odd.
And so we might try to find a different word for that.
Homeostasis is another word from old biology, which might work.
It might be okay to use it if you understand it in the right context.
So I think two or three more important concepts to have in mind when you think about what is a pattern integrity with a trajectory across time.
And just think about this amorphous thing behind me here.
It's a pattern integrity.
It's kind of this wormy thing with colors and bands that you can see are changing with some balls in there.
It's a pattern integrity with a trajectory across time.
And so what's happening in this thing are the balls are coming in, the stripes are coming in and breaking up, the waves are coming in and breaking up.
And so you might think about big terms in a new biology like decomposition and synthesis.
Perhaps it's a better way, I'm still debating this, what we should call a decomposition and composition.
But synthesis is an old word from the old biology and so maybe we should change it to composition.
I think I like that better.
So decomposition and composition are at the center of what I would call a pattern integrity with a trajectory across time.
I'm trying my best to define something as simply as possible so that the most people can get close enough to the finish line today already.
So a pattern integrity, you can kind of think of it as a whirling, amorphous form, you know, like us.
If you thought about you and you sped the film of you up from birth to death over the course of 20 minutes,
now you're kind of getting the idea of what a pattern integrity with a trajectory across time is and and all those frames of that movie that go by in 20 minutes those are the trajectory across time that's smeared across 80 years if you're lucky and during that entire time right at the center of you is an interface of decomposition and composition it has to be by definition it's not
And that's also how you can see a virus or a molecule, by definition, is not a pattern that's occurring at the interface between decomposition and composition.
It's not.
So it's not life, and it's not a pattern integrity with a trajectory across time.
But when you find one, you will see that at the heart of it is an interface between decomposition and composition, between, if you want to use one of the old words, decomposition and synthesis.
And finally, I would put in the middle here that the biggest word, the most important word is symbiosis.
And understanding a multicellular organism as the most extreme version of symbiosis.
Multicellular organisms are the most extreme version of symbiosis, but symbiosis is essential
to a pattern integrity across time and symbiosis is required for there to be an interface between decomposition and composition.
And now this might not make any sense, maybe it makes no sense to you right now but at the end of this course it will make more sense than
it will make much more sense than bad biology because evolution, because DNA.
So think about these two things as we then we're going to pivot to watching a video, which is just basically a journal club.
It's a discussion about the concept of symbiosis in insects.
And I just want you to digest these two basic ideas.
One, there are no diseases
in humans that are blamed on bacteriophages.
Not one, not a few, but zero.
Okay?
And you can basically say the same thing for bacteria.
There are basically no diseases except for food poisoning, which are based on bacteria.
Zero.
And the second thing is, is that bacteriophages are completely free, unrestricted passers of the gut barrier.
They can go wherever the hell they want to.
Just think about that.
Let those thoughts digest.
There are no diseases that are blamed on bacteriophages.
Zero.
Now add in the fact that a lot of anti-vaxxers are gut biologists.
Even some of the most prominent ones right now study the gut microbiome.
And there's not one disease in humanity blamed on bacteriophages.
That's interesting.
I wonder what Joshua Lederberg would think about that because bacteriophages are also, curiously enough, free to pass the gut barrier.
The immune system, I guess, ignores them.
Okay, so let's watch this video and let's see what we get from it.
I'm going to take some notes.
I'm very happy that I got to share those first ideas with you.
Remember, if you didn't hear me earlier, I am going to make the Twitch video disappear and the YouTube video disappear and the Rumble video disappear.
And this video will only remain available on PeerTube.
That's just the way it is, folks.
We're gonna go to full screen here, and then we're gonna hit play.
Hang on!
I don't listen to NIH videos at 1x.
who don't know who we are, but I think this audience mostly does.
We're a weekly seminar series on primarily prokaryotic topics, but other interesting science as well.
And we invite you to join us.
And we every year nominate our favorite people who haven't been here to come and give WALS.
And we're fortunate enough to have Nancy Moran selected from that nomination for this year's WALS talk.
Nancy is the Warren and Viola May Rainer Chair Professor at the University of Texas in Austin.
She's in the Department of Integrated Biology.
And I think most of us who have been in this field a while recognize that some of the most interesting microbiology and just interesting ideas in general come when we sort of have people from very different viewpoints and bring their science.
Oh yeah, I got to push play on this one.
The Department of Integrative Biology feels at this stage to me, as I'm about to present Biology 101 in a new way, it feels redundant.
And in fact, I think these departments of Integrative Biology
actually underscore how bad biology 101 actually is in our civilization right now because they need a department of integrative biology for goodness sakes.
Okay, so here we go.
Sorry, this is not gonna go well if I don't shut up and listen.
It's a wonderful example of that.
She got her undergraduate education at UT Austin and her PhD in Michigan in zoology.
And she, I think, got interested in insects, aphids, fairly early in her career, and then incorporated the microbiome in about 1990, and really has been doing groundbreaking work on the intersection of the microbiome and insects.
She was recognized with the MacArthur Fellowship in 1997, election to the National Academy of Sciences in 2004, a whole long list of prizes, including a lot for molecular ecology, which is not something that us microbiologists are normally thinking about.
And in 2023, received the NAS Selman Waxman Award in Microbiology.
Her PhD, et cetera, she established her lab at the University of Arizona, where she did much of this work, moved in 2010 to Yale for a few years, and then moved from Yale to UT Austin, where she's been from 2013 on.
So we're delighted she could come today.
Now, if at the end you want more, please join us tomorrow for Lambda Lunch at 11 in Building 37 on the sixth floor.
And if you don't know where to go or anything, just catch me at the reception.
And there is a reception after this.
Other important information.
Lambda, as in Lambda phage, I guess.
The CME code is on the board.
It's 50096.
If you are online and want to ask questions, you can send live feedback at any time.
Use the send live feedback button at any time during the talk, or certainly at the end.
For those of you in the room, I guess, unlike Lambda Lunch, we'll save the questions for the end.
But at that point, we'll ask that you come to the microphones so that everyone, including those online, can hear it.
So I'm delighted to have you here, Nancy.
Thanks.
This is her first visit to NIH, which tells you this is long overdue.
So thank you for coming, and we're looking forward to your talk.
Thanks, Susan, and thanks to everyone else who's been organizing this really fun visit.
I've had a lot of great talks with people here today, and I'm looking forward to some more the rest of today and tomorrow, so I'm glad to be here and learning a lot of new things.
Today I'm going to give a very broad talk to kind of cover this very broad field that's developed a lot that I've been part of really since the field started around 1990, and basically it's exploring how microbes interact with insects, and I've always loved insects.
I'm one of those people from a little kid stage that loved insects,
But it's been really a revelation to realize that a lot of what we see in insect biology is due to the microbes living in them, specifically bacteria, in most cases, living in them.
So I'll kind of give a few of the most exciting examples, I think, to show the different ways that this happens.
So insects, okay, you might not know, but they are more than half of all species that are described, of everything.
They are very old.
They originated really when life, when life came onto land.
I mean, they're very ancient, along with the first plants on land about 450 million years ago.
And they have these symbioses, but they were rarely studied until about 30 years ago when molecular tools became available for looking at them.
And then there's been an incredible increase, especially since 2007.
And you might recognize that year as the year when next-gen sequencing became widely available and cheaper, and it really led to a lot more studies.
Wow, interesting.
So in 2007, they finally started looking at
insect microbiota.
It sounds very similar to when Nathan Wolf got his start looking for viruses in the wild and starting all these bioweapons companies in Ukraine.
It's very funny because she is admitting something here, saying something here, but doesn't seem to see the significance of it like I think a real Biology 101 would teach from the very beginning, which is what?
that the whole idea of insects existing in the first place presupposes an insect symbiosis with bacteria in their gut forever.
All of their ancestors going all the way back to whenever would have had this symbiosis with gut bacteria, right?
That 450 million years ago, according to their long clock,
right, where this sort of unstoppable force of evolution started in a mud puddle and got us all the way here.
And through that whole time, although we've only been studying it for like 30 years, the assumption must be that this symbiosis is at the foundation of this biology.
450 million years of it according to her calculations or timeline and her mentor's timeline.
Hope I'm just being seven and you might recognize that year as the year when next-gen sequencing became widely available and cheaper and it really led to a lot more studies.
And there's a huge variety of these interactions, so I'll give you some examples of the different groups.
I can roughly put them into several categories, and the first one I'll talk about are what we sometimes call primary symbionts.
These are obligate for the host.
The host cannot develop without them.
They're strictly maternally transmitted from mother to daughter, from mother to son, too, but he's a dead end, only from mothers, so just like mitochondria.
The genomes are really characteristic, and I'll talk more about that.
They're highly reduced.
Say what?
What?
And examples are a couple of these.
I'll talk more about the examples, especially the Buchenera and aphids, which has been a central model.
So these occur a lot.
They are not restricted to insects.
Are you telling me that these ladies know that insects inherit strains of bacteria from their mothers, just like we inherit our mitochondria from our mothers, but they haven't gone all the way?
They haven't gotten, it's almost like anti-vaxxers that say they're against vaccines, but haven't been able to say that intramuscular injection is obviously dumb.
These people can't get past this?
That if there was evolution, then by definition, this symbiotic relationship occurred at the start?
What?
How are?
There is no complex life on Earth that does not have this at its foundation, and that's something that they don't teach in Biology 101.
Instead, they teach the bad part, which is what?
That there's DNA in all that.
That those insects exist despite all of the pathogens around them.
instead of in symbiosis with, instead of interdependence with, instead of by necessity in symbiosis with.
It's a very subtle difference, ladies and gentlemen, but if you teach a child very early in that very subtle but shitty difference, will result in them being able to passively accept the model of an RNA pandemic and passively accept the consequences of their genes.
and not understand that intramuscular injection is dumb and trust their doctors.
I hope I'm making some sense here.
This is going to take a long time to teach.
A lot of other invertebrates or even in some fungi, but most of the cases that have been studied are in insects.
And then there's a so-called secondary symbionts.
And these are ones that, again, are mostly transmitted maternally.
So in the lab, you can maintain them for hundreds of generations.
They'll be strictly maternally transmitted.
I mean, she's talking about primary and secondary transmitted symbionts, bacteria that are transmitted and that their host is interdependent on.
Come on.
Come on, guys.
Why isn't this the foundation of High School Biology 101?
Why aren't we shown all the examples of this?
The other paper that you can download from my website, from the link, Stuff, is a paper about Rhizophagia.
I wonder what that is.
high fidelity, but we can see that in nature they're jumping around sometimes.
They're horizontally transmitted in nature.
We can see that by doing phylogenies and so on.
And they're more dynamic in terms of their genomes.
They have recombination and bacteriophage and things which are not present in the primary symbionts.
A really common one of these is Wolbachia that is in insects.
It's jumping around, and most insect species have had it in their history, probably all.
And Hamiltonella is an example I'll talk about in aphids.
And then we come to things that are more like gut symbionts and often are gut symbionts.
And this category where there's host specialized symbionts, they live only in the host.
They don't replicate in other environments.
They're restricted to the host, but they're not maternally transmitted.
They're just socially transmitted, just like our gut microbiota.
And then finally, just environmental microbes that might colonize hosts, they might have a big effect on the host, but the microbes themselves live in many different places.
So they haven't evolved specifically with hosts.
So first I'll talk about these so-called primary symbionts.
These are inherited, they're intracellular, usually, there's actually some cases where they're not, but mostly they're intracellular, and they generally live within specialized host cells.
These have evolved again and again, they're called bacteria.
Okay, now I'm not an expert in bacteria, but I did do a master's degree
that ended up to be a Master's of the Arts, but because I didn't finish the research part of it, and that's a long story, but I did a lot of different research projects, and I just kept running into supervisors whose projects were just so bad that after I just couldn't find anybody that I wanted to work with for another year, and it just all fell apart.
So I just did a few more courses and got the hell out of there and wasted a lot of money.
Because I thought a master's would get me into medical school and that was just so dumb.
Anyway, during that time, I did briefly work with somebody who worked on the neurobiology of praying mantises.
And I spent a lot of time learning to dissect them and reading about them and understanding their physiology.
And just so you know, insects are not like us.
They have a very different way of circulating.
Their bodies are very different, differentially organized.
A lot of their neurotransmission is nicotinic.
So, that's the reason why tobacco and nicotine is so poisonous to them.
And so, this is kind of new to me.
And so, when she says intracellular, I just think you should take bacteriocytes.
Somatic cells housing symbionts have evolved repeatedly in insects and other invertebrates.
So, of course, you can see where this is going, right?
Our mitochondria are, and I am not the person who said this, this is a long old idea, our mitochondria are symbionts.
They are not remnants of symbionts.
They are not powerhouses of the cells that used to be Symbionts.
They are Symbionts, is the best way to describe them.
Even if they are generations from the event, or whatever you want to think of as that thing.
They are Symbionts.
If you see them as Symbionts rather than remnants of Symbionts, and that's the most important thing.
Remnants of Symbionts, I gotta get bigger for this one.
Remanence of symbionts is the idea that is required for old biology.
If you want to believe that life is the result of a billion year process that went from simple to complex and you're at the end of it, then you also have to believe that this symbiotic thing that resulted in us having mitochondria occurred so far back in the future that all complex life on earth has mitochondria that are all kind of the same.
And so intracellular in insects, they're fine.
They're called bactericides.
And so we're going to listen to them.
This is the first level, the most primal of intracellular symbionts.
And there's secondary.
And then there's the gut microbiota.
Isn't this cool?
So, they're cells of the host that house the symbionts, usually in the cytoplasm, and often the cytoplasm is basically just stuffed with these bacterial symbionts.
They've evolved over and over, bacteriocytes, from different cell types, and sometimes in the same insect you can have two different cell types that house different bacterial symbionts.
And this is just one example.
The example I'll talk most about, here's an aphid, and it has its gut, and then these yellow things are the ovarioles, and the bacteriocytes are in the body cavity here, and if you just look at one of these tiny embryos, so aphids have prenatal development, and the embryos within the mother.
This is the embryo at a very early stage, and basically almost the entire embryo is the symbionts here.
So basically they're a very big part of development, in many cases early embryonic development.
and this is just showing the later stages, but one important point is in most cases they are actually enclosed in a host derived membrane.
Remember, I'm a neurobiologist.
I learned a lot about the brains of mammals, especially the anatomy of the brains, and neurons, and neuronal function, and ion channels, and ionic currents, and the electrical signals of neurons.
This
This stuff is, you know, there's a lot of stuff that's out there that needs to be brought together under one new Biology 101.
I think it's going to be very easy.
It just falls right in place.
It makes perfect sense if you understand yourself more complexly than public health and the Human Genome Project would like you to understand yourself.
So they're in a vacuole within these bacteriocyte cells.
Well, they're still dominant in embryos.
Early embryologists were looking at insect embryos and other invertebrate embryos, trying to understand development and using light microscopy.
And a very prominent one who noticed these symbionts was named Paul Buchner.
He was an embryologist in Germany.
He documented hundreds of animal symbioses, including hundreds in insects.
He had a lot of treatment of aphids in their symbionts.
And this was all based on microscopy.
And he came up with some ideas.
One, he believed that these symbionts, this type of symbiont, was providing nutrients to the host.
He believed that they were ancient, and these hosts had evolved with him a long time.
And he believed that the host was in control, that these were kind of passive things at this point, and that the host was in control of the symbionts.
He sort of argued this.
His work was translated into English in 1965 in a big book that has all of this kind of ideas in it.
These were mostly right, these ideas, but he had a lot of wrong ideas also in that book because obviously he couldn't know
It's nice that I don't have that book.
I'm looking forward to finding it.
So I think this is quite interesting and the idea of who's controlling who is very interesting.
I don't think that's the right way to think of symbiosis.
I think the idea is that there are always trade-offs.
And I think I would credit Thomas Sowell for that idea.
You know, you can think of social and economic problems as always being trade-offs.
And I don't think that's a bad model for biology either.
And symbiosis is a series, a set of mutually beneficial trade-offs, I think.
But, you know, I'm here to explore the ways that these ideas have been expressed before and to try and
and make sure we don't throw anything out that's already useful.
A lot about what was going on.
So what have we learned since then?
So I'll be using this aphid Buchenera, named after Paul Buchner, symbiosis as a kind of central model.
It really probably is the most studied model of this.
And so in 1989, Paul Bellman at UC Davis was the first to characterize an unculturable symbiont using DNA sequencing.
He used PCR, which was relatively new at the time, and then actually cloned and sequenced the 16S ribosomal RNA.
He then gave this bacterium a name, and he noticed that it's close to E. coli.
It's in the same group of gamma proteobacteria.
Luckily, he called me up one day and said, do you want to work on this?
Because I was working on aphids, and I started working with him and dropped the other things I was doing, and ever since then have primarily worked on symbionts.
In 1993, we did some work looking at... So, notice how parallel this is to virology.
It is an unculturable symbiont.
that they then looked at using DNA sequencing, and she said they just sequenced the ribosome, which I know she said it.
I don't know if that's what she means.
Again, think about how much work this is we have to do.
This is me being a biology coach.
I'm trying to show you what I do with my day all the time.
When you open one of these little boxes of goodies, you find a lot of reading.
And right now, just dissecting that little bit of what she said there.
I mean, that's, this is remarkable.
It's remarkable because look, it's the first to characterize an unculturable symbiont.
That is absolutely the same bullshit that they pull with RNA virology, where it's an unculturable virus.
that they have to make a clone of, a pure DNA quantity that they say accurately represents the quantity that they found, the phenomenon that they identified with sequencing in the original unculturable preparation.
Very similar to what a lot of these no-virus people have been focused on for five years, but unfortunately for them, they've been so hyper-focused on it that they never got here.
the phylogenies for these symbionts and comparing those to phylogenies of the host, and it turns out that the host and symbiont phylogeny map onto each other exactly.
So in other words, they've evolved together, and when speciation occurs in the host, you get divergence in the corresponding symbiont, which is what you'd expect if it's strictly maternal, but the timescale is what's impressive, because these are very old groups.
So aphids based on fossils are at least 150 million years back before that common ancestor.
I like what Catherine put in the chat.
I'm just going to see if I can do this really quick.
She says a lot of unculturable, look at that, I can do it.
A lot of unculturable bacteria strains in soil.
I think that's true, but think just, I'm just gonna try and suggest thinking in a different way.
There's lots of genetic evidence that the diversity of bacteria in soil is extreme.
Whether or not that means that there are all these different strains that don't grow, it might just be that you can't grow very many of these things by themselves and get a homogenous signal that you can go, oh yeah, there's all kinds of Toyotas in that dish.
Maybe that's not possible.
Part of this
And I'm just throwing this out there.
Part of this is to try and make sure that we go back far enough in this observation chain to make sure that we're, you know, not already on the wrong road.
Essentially, you know, we're in a maze and we don't know how far back we've got to go.
We don't go back too far that we missed the turn, but we have to go back far enough so that we're not still trapped.
And this is pretty remarkable.
I love this.
And then in 2000, the first symbiont genome was sequenced.
This was early in genome sequencing days, and by Shigenobu et al.
in Japan, and they sequenced Bucnara of P. aphid.
And since that time, there were more than 12,000 papers on Bucnara and aphids alone.
So there's really been a lot of work on this system, but as you'll see, there's still a lot we really don't know.
So the problem I should mention about these symbionts is they can't be cultured in the lab, and that is why we knew so little about them.
So Bucnero, we got a genome.
What was it like?
Well, it turned out to be tiny.
It was 580 encoded proteins, about 600 kilobases.
It looks just, surprisingly at the time at least, it looks just like a reduced E. coli genome, basically a subset of E. coli genes.
There were only two sort of novel orphan genes, and that remains to be the case with many more Bucnero genomes.
Of course.
So many, many gene functions.
Of course, E. coli is the bacteria, one of the bacteria that are in our guts.
And we really need to look at this question with fresh eyes.
Do we understand it?
What those rainbow-colored pictures that Sabine Hazan puts on all of her
all of her talks and pretends that she has a very stupid, complicated explanation for what those colors mean and whether or not those bands are big or small.
And if there's lots of bands, it's better than few bands.
And it's bifidobacteria or whatever she says.
Ladies and gentlemen, it is not by accident that the fake anti-vaccine movement in America has always had someone there to curate the gut narrative.
And now
They have even more people there to curate the gut narrative.
It's because they are still defending the bad biology 101, evolution because DNA, and this whole idea that they can take control of the evolution of the species that goes all the way back to bad, bad old books about it, when they didn't have all this nonsense biological mythology to back up their ideas.
I'm not going to get through this in time.
I can see that already, so I'm just warning you.
We're lost.
Most regulatory genes, most transporters, most DNA repair genes, and also many genes involved in making the cell envelope, peptidoglycan, LPS, and phospholipids, many of those were missing as well.
What was retained, it still retains all the genes for translation, so we're making a ribosome.
tRNA synthetases, DNA polymerase, you know, so replication, transcription, and translation, basic machinery for that is retained.
So, it's still like a cell in many ways.
And then the other thing it retains, kind of impressively given how small these genomes are, are some biosynthetic pathways that are basically what is needed by the host.
So, Buchner had hypothesized they're making nutrients for the host.
That turns out to be true.
And in the case of Buchnera, it's making amino acids.
essential amino acids, so the ones that are essential for animals broadly, including us, but also including insects.
On the right here, so aphids feed on phloem sap.
It's basically a sterile diet that has a lot of sugar in it, and it has free amino acids, but the amino acid profile is very unbalanced from the point of view of animal nutrition.
It's got all these non-essential amino acids, kind of the cheap amino acids,
And then the essential amino acids, which tend to have the longer pathways and require more ATP to make them, those are the ones that animals in general have lost, and those are the exact set of pathways that Bupnera has kept, so complementary to what the aphid could do.
So interestingly, she says that these pathways, metabolic pathways, are often lost by animals and filled in by bacteria, or in this case, I guess, bacteriocytes, right?
Cells that have obligate symbionts in them that are descended from bacteria.
This is crazy, ladies and gentlemen.
This is a silly amount of language to describe the
a pattern integrity that occurs at the interface of decomposition and composition with a trajectory across time.
That's it.
And when you understand it in that way, what does the bacteria do?
They provide, it's the interface between decomposition and composition.
You are carrying around a compost heap in your gut and you're not sick.
You're basically burning, breaking things down.
Chemical bonds are breaking, but in a very controlled manner so that you don't take them all the way down to useless and extract what is necessary.
These are not simple processes that involve you eating at Chick-fil-A and your gut absorbing everything good and rejecting everything not, and then what everything is rejected comes out the other end.
It is a spectacularly
well-orchestrated metabolic process where a symbiotic relationship between metabolic symbionts occurs.
And it's not a antagonistic one, where if the bacteria had their way, they would destroy you.
Or if barriers break down, they're going to destroy you.
Those are all wrong ways of thinking about it.
incorrect ways of thinking about it.
And I think we can start to put together a better way of thinking about it if we start to teach our children that they are indeed pattern integrities, which is something that occurs and sustains a form, but needs to take things in and requires energy to be there.
And at the heart
of any pattern integrity is this interface between decomposition and composition that if the balance is not maintained is unhealthy.
But maintaining that balance is part of optimizing that trajectory across time.
And that's what it means to be human.
I think it's really brilliant.
I think it's really beautiful.
And then some other work by Paul Bauman's lab.
We don't have to deny the biology that's out there.
We have to reclassify the observations and recategorize them and rearrange some books.
And then there's a lot of books we have to throw away, but most of them have an SP on the back of their spine, and so they're easy to find in libraries.
Back then, and also a lab in Spain, Andres Moya,
Bupnera genome also includes some plasmids, and those plasmids are devoted to making extra copies of some of the genes that limit the rate of production of tryptophan and leucine, two of the essential amino acids.
So it seems like specific adaptations to better produce for the host benefit.
And so since that time, many, many of these nutrient provisioning symbionts have been found.
And people have done phylogenetics in our lab and other labs to show that these are ancient in the host.
And a lot of features, major features in the lifestyles of insects are due to these symbionts.
So example, if you wonder why.
I just see a nice question in the chat, and I thought I would address it.
So if you spray your salad with E. coli and you adjust it, will that increase your E. coli enough to make you sick when we should be sick already with E. coli in us?
Well, remember where they sit, right?
It's a compartment.
It's a place.
And it's that balance.
I mean, that's what makes it so magical, right?
It's how do we do that?
How is that happening?
How is that not at the center?
of what we understand about our biology.
How is that not central if the bacteriophages of that compost heap are free to move through our body and interact with our system?
Then it's not just bacteria on the other side of a wall that we're holding back and hoping that they don't get through.
What happens in payers' patches?
with those bacteria?
What happens at M cells?
What's happening in the gut?
What happens in rhizophagy?
What happens in these relationships with insects and bacteria in these different stages of symbiosis, these different levels of
Can you see it coming already?
I think it's just gorgeous.
It's just the most beautiful thing that the pandemic gave to me is this new way of seeing the world, new way of seeing my kids, a new way of motivating my kids, a new way of explaining and seeing the world.
It's just extraordinary.
Beetles sometimes are very hard.
They have that hard cuticle.
They have a symbiont that makes extra tyrosine, which is a substrate for making melanin, which is what makes beetles hard.
And then cockroaches, they live on nitrogen-poor diets.
Their symbiont recycles the cockroach's own nitrogen waste, the uric acid, and then also makes amino acids.
And then white flies are sort of like aphids.
They need amino acids because they, essential amino acids, because they feed on phloem sap.
But in this case, they also make carotenoids for white flies.
And because I'm at NIH, I want to mention something relevant to health.
So these kind of symbionts also occur in a lot of insects, important to human health, because insects that feed on blood generally are not getting B vitamins that are required in insect metabolism.
So bedbugs, they have a special version of Wolbachia that makes B vitamins, these lovely things.
Body lice have another type of symbiont from the gamma proteobacteria that, again, makes B vitamins, but otherwise has this reduced genome and all these features that are similar to what I described for Bucnera.
And then tsetse flies have a symbiont called Wigglesworthia, and it also makes B vitamins required for the host.
So these are all blood-feeding insects.
So in some groups, it gets really complicated.
And Buchner had a favorite group, which he called the Fairyland of Symbiosis.
And it's a group of plant sap-feeding insects.
And it's the okinorhynchus.
It's called the clade.
And they feed.
There's a huge number.
There are leafhoppers, cicadas, spittlebugs, all these planthoppers.
So all of these, you've all seen them a lot.
And they're major agricultural pests in some cases.
And there's a lot of species of them.
Well, it turns out that they can have up to three or four different symbionts in the same insect living in different types of bacteriocytes.
And very commonly, they have two.
And it turns out with, you know, lots of work by some of the people in my lab, including John and Gordon shown here, that working out phylogenies and where these bacteria live and looking at, we can see that they colonize a couple of bacteria were in the common ancestor of this whole group, about 260 million years, and then diversified with them, but in some cases,
As long as we're still talking with the chat, I'm almost done here.
It's well, it's one 30.
I can keep going for a while yet.
Um, if, uh, it's not that there are, it's not that there are strains that are beneficial or not beneficial in my imagination.
What I think you should be thinking about is the idea that you inherit and you, you develop a,
compost heap in your gut.
And that is a consequence of the people that raise you, the people that you're around, the food that you eat, you know, everything, the amount of poop you get in your mouth, the whole thing.
And
I don't think it's impossible.
For example, the thing that's cited in the chat is the E. coli family is large and there are beneficial strains for the human gut and toxin producing strains that kill humans but are benign in cattle.
I would suggest that we at least imagine the possibility that if you took that strain from the cattle and you exposed a child, a newborn child to that bacteria as part of their breastfeeding,
that they might develop a gut bacteria closer to that of a cow.
I could be completely wrong but I want you to think on that as a concept to understand how this symbiosis might have occurred from your day of birth until you were an adult and how that trajectory through time might have been optimized or not optimized.
Think about how that trajectory across time might've been optimized or not optimized by the intramuscular injection of vaccines, for example.
That's where I think this, again, I'm trying to edify the biology that I think got us here and sparked this whole re-imagination of Biology 101 in the first place.
And that is that intramuscular injection of a combination of substances with the intent to augment a healthy human
is really ridiculous.
And I think if you understand your child and yourself has a pattern integrity with a trajectory across time, whose trajectory could be optimized by exercise and nutrition and lack of stress and love and friendship, now you're getting closer.
Because one of them would be lost and replaced by yet a different bacterium that sort of moves into the system and occupies a new cell type, a new type of bacteriocyte.
There's a bit of turnover, but there's sort of this tapestry of symbionts coming and going.
So this really would have been a dream of Buchner to work out this kind of history.
He actually kind of speculated about these kind of events.
And what we can do that Buchner couldn't, sequencing genomes of these, it turns out that when you look at a pair of these symbionts that are in the same host, they have exactly complementary nutritional capabilities.
So especially in terms of amino acids, which is the main thing they make.
Okay, just let me make sure for for six girl in the chat, not arguing with you.
And I'm certainly not claiming to know what would happen or what has happened or what has been tested.
If that is the case, then what you may have is a
a symbiotic specificity that supersedes this idea that I'm thinking of as a more general symbiotic relationship.
And in that case, all that means is that this is even more important to understanding
ourselves as a pattern integrity because it's not just, you know, whatever gut bacteria is in there, but it is essential to understand that symbiotic relationship as part of this trajectory across time and trajectory across generations.
And I like that.
I'm fine with that.
I'm totally fine with that.
In fact, I think it, in a lot of ways, makes the idea of a new Biology 101 in this kind of context of symbiosis at the interface of decomposition and composition a really compelling idea.
So, thanks for arguing with me.
I appreciate that.
So you'll have one making eight of the essential amino acids, the other one making two.
Or you'll have one making seven, the other one making three.
And they pair up and basically the redundant pathways that must have been present when they first entered the symbiosis, when they all had all the pathways, get lost.
And so you pair it down to the host has these pathways, each symbiont has a complementary set.
Those really fit together very beautifully and really kind of gave you confidence in using genomics to understand what's going on.
So one thing that's unexpected in all of this that I mentioned briefly is these are tiny genomes.
In fact, the tiniest known cellular genomes are in these insect symbionts.
The record is 120 KB.
I think it's 130 protein coding genes.
It's the bare minimum for making a ribosome translation
transcription, replication, and making a few nutrients for the host.
And so we keep discovering these.
They evolve over and over.
This is just showing a graph of genome size and number of protein-coding genes in bacteria.
It's really nice.
One KB, one gene on average.
But the tiny insect symbiont genomes are down here.
So very, very small.
Bucnara itself was not at all the smallest.
Many smaller ones were found later.
We found a number of those in different insects.
For a little while, all the smallest genomes of cellular organisms were from Tucson, Arizona, where my lab was, because we'd just go out and find them.
It was nothing about Tucson.
They're all over the world, but it was just a matter of discovering them and then figuring out, using the benefit of next-gen sequencing, that these things were out there.
So, how do these things work?
Okay, so again, she states that next-generation sequencing is what is allowing this to happen, and next-generation sequencing is a lot of hocus-pocus.
It's metagenomic sequencing.
It's a lot of hocus pocus based on assumptions.
Assumptions about, you know, distinct strains, assumptions about none of those signals being phage signals, assumptions about all kinds of stuff.
And yet, despite that, at least their model of this
pattern integrity, this symbiosis is better.
I guess, you know, one of the things to think about with insects is their genetic diversity and whether or not you can even think of a single insect as an individual upon which evolution can act relative to a human.
Maybe that's one of the biggest gifts that we've been given as a
as individuals is that we are able to act on our own future and change and build things that we can leave to our children.
And insects don't do that.
Plants don't do that.
And evolution doesn't have that built into it.
like we as humans have been given that gift.
And so think about how important it is that old, the bad biology 101 essentially takes that gift away from you because it says that evolution, because DNA, which means you are just a blip in time, and you are obviously obligated to contribute to the whole, which is the species.
and the evolution of it and where we go in the future, rather than thinking about, you know, what you can contribute to our understanding of this irreducible complexity and our appreciation for it and, and, and, and make sure that the, the sacred nature of ourselves is passed on to our children as opposed to lost.
And instead, you know, this bad biology is used to enslave our kids.
I really am happy with where I'm at.
I don't know if this video is really helping me anymore.
The host has evolved a lot to control and support these symbionts.
We can tell that.
What we don't know is the real mechanisms and just the experimental limitations of these systems are really great because we can't grow the symbionts separately from the host.
But using genomics and transcriptomics and things, we've done a lot of work trying to look at what genes are expressed in the bacteriocytes.
How do those change during the life cycle of the bacteriocytes?
And so now again, I just want to point out some of the assumptions that she's making because of the Bad Biology 101 frame that this all has to sit in.
The assumption is that there are genes and that they can sequence those genes and monitor their change, even though sequencing itself is a probabilistic result, even though sequencing itself is a model
that says that we can read a single molecule by making millions of copies of it.
And it's a pretty high fidelity process.
That's a giant assumption that they were already ready to make already 20 years ago and are still making now.
And it's assumption based on the idea that genes were always there.
We were always going to find genes.
And as soon as we found DNA, that meant everything else that we thought about evolution, the whole process, the timeline, the incremental mutations that led to us.
They all have to be true.
It's just a matter of whether we're going to find them because we found DNA.
and of the symbiosis within an individual host lifetime, and how does those work together?
And I won't go into details, but I'll just mention that there are these very clear coordinated shifts in what genes are being expressed in the symbiont and in the host and the bactericide in which it resides.
And so we have shifts in metabolism to different states, and it seems to be coordinated and predictable through the life cycle of the aphid.
So how this happens, what molecules are going back and forth, there's a lot that we don't know about.
What molecules are going back and forth?
Gee, I wonder what signaling process is a bacteria or some symbiotic remnant of a bacteria would use to communicate with its host.
and of course we can end it right here i think that's a perfect place to end i didn't think she would say that that's that's just wonderful we don't know what it is it's just like denny rancor saying you know we have this sustained increase in all-cause mortality but i got no idea where it came from it's just like having a having somebody like nick hudson who's an actuary say the same thing it's just
It's just absurd, ladies and gentlemen.
It's absolutely absurd where we are.
This has been Biology 101.
I hope that this is going to help people understand a little bit about where this is going.
Tomorrow we're going to have a little better and a little thicker discussion of this and some of the evidences there.
So please take a look at those two journal club papers that I attached.
If you want to see the rest of this video, I wonder if I can do that for you.
I saw somebody ask that question.
Let me just bring this over to the other side here and then I'll check that out.
I think I can do it.
I think I found it on YouTube.
So let me just go and see if I got a history that I can follow here.
Is it going to let me switch?
Yes, it is.
And history here.
And let me search that and see if I can find insects.
search uh no i'll i'll i'll find it it's a it's i i have it in the folder so maybe i can find the name of the folder hold on one second i'm sorry this is annoying i get it um this is is it here darn it now i'm stalling out killing the end of the show darn thing um
I don't remember where I stored it.
Darn, darn, darn, I'm failing miserably here.
Might be in that folder.
I can't find it.
I'll find it later.
Oh yeah, here it is.
It's called The World of Insect Bacterial Symbiosis, What We Have and Have Not Learned.
The World of Insect Bacterial Symbiosis, What We Have and Have Not Learned.
And it's an NIH discussion.
I can't remember the name of the YouTube channel.
Anyway, sorry.
That's the best you get today.
What is a pattern integrity with a trajectory across time?
I want you to start thinking about
a interface between decomposition and synthesis, which we are now going to call, I think we've decided we're going to call it composition.
Composition.
And more importantly, symbiosis and a spectrum of symbiosis, a continuum of symbiosis that goes from ecosystems, you know, all the way to a multicellular organism and understanding that that is a continuum.
It's not like you're either symbiotic or you're not, or you're a parasite or you're not, or you're, you know, you're in the food chain or you're not.
All of these things are old biology.
We're going to start first and foremost
had thinking about a pattern integrity with a trajectory across time as occurring at the interface between decomposition and composition and what is required for that interface to exist is a complex symbiosis.
And so if you want to teach your kids this, you can start teaching your kids that they are responsible for optimizing their trajectory through time.
In fact, a lot of people who are good at that and end up being good at that end up to be pro-whatevers.
Because that's how it works.
Skill is an optimization across time.
Piano playing, basketball, reading, exercise.
We've got to optimize our trajectory across time and we've got to teach our children to see themselves as that way.
See their lives as an opportunity of that nature.
A responsibility to their maker.
Ladies and gentlemen, if you like this work, please go to GiggleAndBiological.com and find a way to support it.
We need every little bit we can.
We do have some big supporters out there that keep kicking it down and making us able to get across the finish line.
But I don't want to, and I don't think it's right, and I don't think I can.
Rely on those people forever given how much they give on some months And so please if you can who just find a way ten bucks a month would be fantastic But even just a small one-time donation would be great, but even better if
What would be really great is an army of people that are just sharing the work.
And this work will be archived at stream.gigaohm.bio under the Biology 101 channel, which you can find at that home.
And then we can talk about this stuff at gigaohm.bio as well.
We're still working on the download thing.
Is not going to be fixed until the next version of PeerTube, which kind of stinks.
And so I'm not sure really how to figure that out right now, other than I probably have to cut some clips on my own and give Jeff a break for a little while.
And hopefully we'll get a pretty quick update and it'll be a small one.
And I'm sure that we can get that up as soon as that's available.
Again, thank you very much for being here.
Really really do appreciate everyone in the chat.
I am reading them.
Sometimes.
I just can't always respond and Let's see.
What should we?
What should we play out with I guess this one's alright So, thanks very much guys see you again tomorrow
Okay, I couldn't find the Pontiac video.
I promise I look for it.
I'll find it soon.
It's just in the wrong folder.
I think I moved it on the archive.
Thanks very much.
See you later.