jimmydasaint

That was brilliant! Please give me instructions, preferably in bullet points. Wonderful and can be tweaked. Both worked on my computer perfectly. Well done. Please share your method.

This is so damn clever. If I read it correctly, CRISPR is a tool to edit DNA in a specific way. CRISPR has two parts to it: a cutting tool called Cas9 and a guide RNA. The RNA guide strand which is complementay to specific DNA binds to it. As it does so, the Cas9 bit of CRISPR cuts the DNA. Usual gene editing can add or delete a piece of DNA if required. This is a mutation created specifically in a specific part of the DNA.

In this case, the toolkit is used so that the very DNA of the cell which made the guide RNA is cut by CRISPR but only if a certain molecule is present, e.g. like a molecule present during inflammation. As the DNA is cut by the CRISPR, a deletion is made (frameshift?) which then changes the sequence of the guide RNA. The CRISPR then travels back to the DNA with a changed sequence and cuts it out. the longer the stimulus/inflammation etc... molecule is present, the more mutations that accumulate in the DNA that codes for the guide RNA.

Others can correct my interpretation, but, if what I have written is correct, this is the most exciting thing I have read in years. Great find DrmDoc!

(Caveat - if I have ballsed up the explanation, please correct me)

 

When using CRISPR to edit genes, researchers create RNA guide strands that match a target sequence in the host organism’s genome. To encode memories, the MIT team took a different approach: They designed guide strands that recognize the DNA that encodes the very same guide strand, creating what they call “self-targeting guide RNA.”

 

Led by this self-targeting guide RNA strand, Cas9 cuts the DNA encoding the guide strand, generating a mutation that becomes a permanent record of the event. That DNA sequence, once mutated, generates a new guide RNA strand that directs Cas9 to the newly mutated DNA, allowing further mutations to accumulate as long as Cas9 is active or the self-targeting guide RNA is expressed.

By using sensors for specific biological events to regulate Cas9 or self-targeting guide RNA activity, this system enables progressive mutations that accumulate as a function of those biological inputs, thus providing genomically encoded memory.

For example, the researchers engineered a gene circuit that only expresses Cas9 in the presence of a target molecule, such as TNF-alpha, which is produced by immune cells during inflammation. Whenever TNF- alpha is present, Cas9 cuts the DNA encoding the guide sequence, generating mutations. The longer the exposure to TNF-alpha or the greater the TNF-alpha concentration, the more mutations accumulate in the DNA sequence.

By sequencing the DNA later on, researchers can determine how much exposure there was.

http://news.mit.edu/2016/recording-analog-memories-human-cells-0818?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000618

Images show DNA being made into complementary RNA and then an image on how CRISPR works.

Wow! i have just read the discussion above. I won't add my tuppence worth but I would advise the writer of the OP to read the following and, if there are any issues, to get back to the wise and compassionate staff on Sfn.

http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-hydrostatic-pressure.htm

Thank you. I take it that I need to use a disk with the animation on it. Is there any way to take an animation off a website and then embed it into a post for education purposes?

Thank you for that heads up. Is it difficult to do given my limited computer knowledge?

Any clues. I can just about login to Science Forum and have a reasonable knowledge of Word processing and Excel ( enough knowledge to make a Table in Word and change a cell value in Excel).

So, my knowledge of using code is very limited.

I would really like to present something like this in a post as an animation:

http://highered.mheducation.com/sites/0072495855/student_view0/chapter14/animation__transmission_across_a_synapse.html

I think a good animation or diagram is better than a hundred words:

http://highered.mheducation.com/sites/0072495855/student_view0/chapter14/animation__transmission_across_a_synapse.html

Come back after watching it and ask for further help if necessary.

Pretty spiritual stuff here iNow. That is a nice quote from the author. Believe it or not, this was the thing that absolutely hooked me into biology as a teenager. It was the recycling of all matter throughout the biosphere. It was stunning and awesome.

 

 

On a general note, are there estimates of how many atoms we have that are recycled from humans of old, or about how quickly the body recycles its cells? I seem to remember a figure of 7 years to recycle all body cells (except for brain cells?)?

Sorry about this but your citation referenced a person who did not write was stated. Do you have a different citation please?

 

 

This data was first pointed out by Dr. Paul C. Aebersold in 1953 in a landmark paper he presented to the Smithsonian Institute, “Radioisotopes - New keys to knowledge”

 

• http://www.archive.org/stream/an...

I looked up the original 1953 paper and must have missed all these facts. Aebersold only mentioned applications of radioisotopic iodine etc...

I am a member of a Hepatitis C forum for people who are afflicted with it. I am happy to say that NHS treatment cured me of it and I am in a normal state of health now, luckily.

 

That is good news.

 

My question is: Is it responsible for the forum administration to be complicit in allowing members to talk to each other about acquiring generic medicines from overseas? I know at least of one or two of them that are treating themselves without medical supervision or, at most, paying privately to have their viral loads tested, and the number is growing. Most GPs won’t agree to help them with the necessary tests to monitor the effects of treatment which can be serious and life-threatening if certain physiological parameters are allowed to fall outside the safe range. Ribavirin, for instance, causes anaemia as a side effect and one either has a dose reduction if the leucocyte count goes too low or even taken off them, which means treatment is cancelled. This is just one example of many potential pitfalls, depending on the state of the patient.

 

I just wondered about when a person should be treated as an adult and, knowing the risks, be allowed to self mediate or self cure? As a reasonably educated adult, I make decisions about how to self medicate all the time. For example, I take vitamins and minerals on a regular basis because I believe (conceive) that we have a nutrient rich but mineral poor diet in the UK. I could be wrong about processed foods but I make my choice. In a life-threatening situation I will scour the Internet and then still make my choice. The forum Mods are in a special community and can make sure the members are aware of the consequences of their choices.

 

 

Buying imported Hep C drugs, through buying clubs is a recent phenomenon; probably a year or so ago it started.

 

The members who report a positive experience and coming out cured are now encouraging those who still have to wait, because they are not ill enough for these extremely expensive branded new drugs, are getting the itch to pursue this generic path themselves. The available treatment for those that don’t qualify, which I did (interferon +ribavirin), is horrible to put it mildly and they don’t want to do it and don’t want to wait either. The cost to the NHS is about £25-30 000 who have to buy in the branded versions, whereas the generic imported version can be bought for about £1000 from Indias by an individul but I can’t help but feel this is going to cause real damage to some people who go this path and we’ll never know, only that they stopped posting.

 

From an ethical point of view, can you blame them? I don't. I would use any available method to prolong my life, as long as I was aware of the risks. I suppose the Administrators could write a disclaimer and then let adults make their choices. Was it Harry Potter's Dean who said that our lives are the sum of the consequences? Or was it someone with a more literary reputation.

 

 

We are stardust.

 

It's beautiful the way the universe (aka all of us and all things) recycles itself.

 

An author (Eckert Tolle?) wrote: "We are the universe expressing itself as a human being for a while." I tend to agree.

Pretty spiritual stuff here iNow. That is a nice quote from the author. Believe it or not, this was the thing that absolutely hooked me into biology as a teenager. It was the recycling of all matter throughout the biosphere. It was stunning and awesome.

On a general note, are there estimates of how many atoms we have that are recycled from humans of old, or about how quickly the body recycles its cells? I seem to remember a figure of 7 years to recycle all body cells (except for brain cells?)?

The actual cells are different IIRC. I will return with a citation if I find it. IIRC, maternal cells enter the embryo during pregnancy and embryonic cells enter the mother and, in certain cases in animals, had a protective effect. Awesome and beautiful. However, and this also needs citations, some forms of electromagnetic radiation damage DNA in germ cells. Keep the ideas coming and keep posting them in Speculations.

 

Fetal cells migrate into the mother during pregnancy. Fetomaternal transfer probably occurs in all pregnancies and in humans the fetal cells can persist for decades. Microchimeric fetal cells are found in various maternal tissues and organs including blood, bone marrow, skin and liver. In mice, fetal cells have also been found in the brain. The fetal cells also appear to target sites of injury. Fetomaternal microchimerism may have important implications for the immune status of women, influencing autoimmunity and tolerance to transplants. Further understanding of the ability of fetal cells to cross both the placental and blood-brain barriers, to migrate into diverse tissues, and to differentiate into multiple cell types may also advance strategies for intravenous transplantation of stem cells for cytotherapeutic repair. Here we discuss hypotheses for how fetal cells cross the placental and blood-brain barriers and the persistence and distribution of fetal cells in the mother.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2633676/

I cannot verify the scientific accuracy of the following. I can only present it:

Please read the quote, it is actually about stripping hydrogen atoms off DNA, not breaking phosphodiester bonds:

 

 

A team of researchers has achieved a long-sought scientific goal: using laser light to break specific molecular bonds. The process uses laser light, instead of heat, to strip hydrogen atoms from silicon surface

This is a key step in the manufacture of computer chips and solar cells, so the achievement could reduce the cost and improve the quality of a wide variety of semiconductor devices.

https://www.scienced...60518181301.htm

I am also including an animation on DNA. Look at the complications of the bonds:

http://www.johnkyrk.com/DNAanatomy.html

Keep in mind that DNA damage and DNA mutation are two different things when you are reading this post.

 

So here I start another post based on jimmydasaint's request. The question revolves around DNA damage and aging again. About my speculation in simple term, when I was born my DNA is perfect with no DNA damage of aging because I start out as normal born baby. Now as time goes on my DNA starts to get lesions, not mutations, as I grow old, that's what the DNA damage theory says. Now this theory does not go into replication but I speculate that when I am 30 years old and my cell goes through mitosis, it produces an identical 30 years old cell, not baby cell, equally damaged because it is old. Speculation continues, now at age 30 I produce sperm and if I get lucky I would get a female mate of 28 and have a baby. Now the baby is not of age (30+28)/2=29 years old when it's born, the baby also doesn't age faster normally. This could only mean that the sperm and ovum cell's DNA does not have any lesions because the baby has a perfect DNA. The sperm is produced from the testes germ cells through mitosis. Now here's the important speculation part of two points for myself at 30 years old.

 

1. The DNA of the germ cells in the testes is a fresh copy ever since I am born. It remains the same and does not receive any lesions that would cause it to age.

 

I disagree here. Germ cell DNA is at least as sensitiive to lesions or mutagenesis as body cells. In fact DNA damage to sperm DNA can cause infertility. In addition, Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) may damage oocytes, but that is a speculation.

 

 

 

DNA damage in sperm is one of the major causes of male infertility and is of much concern in relation to the paternal transmission of mutations and cancer (Zenzes, 2000; Aitken et al., 2003; Fernández-Gonzalez, 2008). It is now clear that DNA damaged spermatozoa are able to reach the fertilization site in vivo (Zenzes et al., 1999), fertilize oocytes and generate early embryos both in vivo and in vitro. The effect of ROS on human oocytes is not as easy to study or quantify. It is a common consensus that the maternal genome is relatively well protected while in the maturing follicle; however damage may occur during the long quiescent period before meiotic re-activation (Zenzes et al., 1998). In fact, during the final stages of follicular growth, the oocyte may be susceptible to damage by ROS.

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20663262

 

2. The DNA of the germ cells also receive lesions and ages, but in meiosis I and meiosis II and become zygote and eventually baby have an important step that fixes these lesions with a perfect repair, not the usual partial repair we have in our cells, it could also be that the genes are shuffled around in meiosis I and meiosis II that fixes the damage.

 

Why do I come to this conclusion? Because the baby is not of age 29 years old when it's born or the baby ages faster with a damaged DNA, the baby's DNA has to be perfect with no damages when it's born.

 

I don't know about meiotic repair, you would have to cite something to prove your point. Nevertheless, repair mechanisms occur to re-age chromatin in germ cells:

 

 

 

Telomeres protect and cap linear chromosome ends, yet these genomic buffers erode over an organism’s lifespan. Short telomeres have been associated with many age-related conditions in humans, and genetic mutations resulting in short telomeres in humans manifest as syndromes of precocious aging. In women, telomere length limits a fertilized egg’s capacity to develop into a healthy embryo. Thus, telomere length must be reset with each subsequent generation. Although telomerase is purportedly responsible for restoring telomere DNA, recent studies have elucidated the role of alternative telomeres lengthening mechanisms in the reprogramming of early embryos and stem cells, which we review here.

 

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/bmri/2014/925121/

 

 

Now for the conclusions for speculations 1 and 2:

 

1. For speculation 1, if we can obtain an undamaged DNA from the germ cells then we know which part of the DNA is damaged in other cells of the body and attempt to replace them with the undamaged one assuming all the DNA in our body are the same but only differs with gene expression.

2. For speculation 2, we need to identify the step that does a perfect repair to the DNA and duplicate that process for all the cells in our body.

Keep in mind that in order to change the DNA in our body we need a nanomachine, crispr also works but we need 100% accuracy. I haven't found a DNA nanomachine capable of altering DNA.

 

I thought that different humans would receive different damage depending on exposure to different ROS, different chemicals (mutagenesis), different diet, different ages (older people accumulating more hypothesised damage, different genders, different professions etc... I think you would struggle to ask 100 women to donate their ova and for your research to be performed unless the legislative authorities allow experiments on human eggs. There is a serious ethical issue here, in my opinion, which religious groups would jump upon. As for nanomachines, I don't imagine that nanoscience has yet reached this stage.

 

P.S. I feel that the DNA damage theory is a bit outdated, everyone follow a set age normally of 100+- years of age. You don't live longer or shorter because of damages done to your DNA

 

For a short chart:

1. parent undamaged DNA + parent undamaged DNA -> baby undamaged DNA

2. perfect repair(parent damaged DNA) + perfect repair(parent damaged DNA) -> baby undamaged DNA

 

How many sperm would be repaired given that there are 300 million approx. released per ejaculation?

 

The idea is good and you posted in the correct place. But, it needs a bit more background research about what is possible and what is not yet in the vista of scientific capability.

 

 

A team of researchers has achieved a long-sought scientific goal: using laser light to break specific molecular bonds. The process uses laser light, instead of heat, to strip hydrogen atoms from silicon surfaces.

This is a key step in the manufacture of computer chips and solar cells, so the achievement could reduce the cost and improve the quality of a wide variety of semiconductor devices.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/05/060518181301.htm

The article is about computer chips. If you have a personal theory fredreload, why not state it clearly. This is the proper forum for speculations and psudoscience.

Another couple of worrying statistics:

1. black women are more likely to die in childbirth than white women, regardless of demographic factor matches between both races.

 

Black women still experience the greatest risk of dying from pregnancy complications

One stark — and somewhat inexplicable — trend in pregnancy-related deaths is that black women are significantly more likely to die than their peers.

Studies have shown that black women are less likely to begin prenatal care in the first trimester and are more likely to have pre-existing chronic conditions such as hypertension,diabetes, or obesity than white women. But this still doesn’t account for the enormity of the disparity that currently exists.

Black women are two to three times more likely to die from pregnancy complications than white women. What’s more, researchers found this to be true regardless of age, education, or similarities in living conditions.

And the disparity is growing worse. The maternal death rate for black women rose from 34 percent in 2007 to 42.8 percent in 2011. During the same time period the maternal death rate for white women only increased by 0.7 percentage points.

2. As much as one third of the deaths were preventable. In the richest nation in the world, people are dying from having poor healthcare, or poor healthcare education - the purview of public healthcare bodies. My worry is that propaganda and political shenanigans have started in the UK to privatise and polarise healthcare in this country by picking on the conditions for junior doctors (this makes my blood boil, but I don't want to sideline your thread).

 

Lots of maternal deaths are preventable. But we don’t have the right public infrastructure in place.

We know that maternal mortality is a big problem in the United States. But one of the most vexing issues researchers face is the absence of reliable data. Some states have maternal deaths review boards to collect data. But other states don’t. And what the boards do can vary tremendously from state to state, leaving public health researchers with an incomplete view of the problem.

And its especially important to study pregnancy-related deaths because the best research we have suggests as many as one in three were preventable. So, public health officials are now working on a national initiative to review every single pregnancy-related death in America — and the movement is building momentum.

 

Jimmy, I'm going in for a 9 hour surgery in a couple days, while I hope it goes smoothly, if it doesn't I'll report back... then again maybe not! I wonder what the surgeon would say if i asked him to set up an object that I could identify if I had an OOBE...

Of course I hope it goes smoothly and that you are fit and well again. But, if you have time and you could ask the surgeon to put a photograph on top of the lights just in case . But in reality, my very best wishes for the operation and hope that you will come back at a time that 10 extrasolar Earth-like planets are discovered, just to cheer you up.

With respect, your OP is what I answered. That subject is not closed unless you comment on the paper extract that I gave you and then we come to a conclusion. If you are creating another question, why not start a new thread?

So as I've mentioned before. If the cell divide with mitosis, it would produce an identical cell at the same age. Just like I am age 30, so my cell would go through mitosis and produce an identical cell of age 30. Now here is my question about aging, when a cell goes through meiosis it produces cells with chromosomes that are halved known as gametes(sperm and egg). When sperm and egg combines, it produces a zygote which is of age zero (something that will turn into a baby). Now how does a human of age 30 produces sperm of age zero with meiosis? Some suggests that telomere is the key to aging, but when sperm is produced, is the telomere completely restored? I'm pretty sure normally there wouldn't be any defects to the babies, and humans doesn't give birth to a baby with shorter telomere, that means to reverse aging or to set the DNA back to its zero state is done in meiosis and all we have to do is to open a sperm and check its DNA to find out. If the sperm's DNA has a longer telomere, then we know it is restored in the meiosis process. If it is not, then something else might be at work.

Then there is the DNA damage theory, the DNA damage theory says that your DNA gets damaged as you grow older, but I think the zygote or babies can't possibly grow up with damaged DNA from the sperm, that means the DNA must also be repaired in the meiosis process. If the DNA is not repaired, then we know that DNA damage does not contribute to aging, all that matters is the telomere, or something else. I would like to know what you think Strange if you are reading this post

I don't understand why this is posted in the "speculations" thread. Nevertheless, the restoration of telomere length is a poorly understood process, but this seems to occur at an early developmental stage, not during meiosis but possibly during post-fertilisation mitosis, if I have read this paper correctly:

I gave you a fairly long quote without editing by me:

Stem cells and cancer cells maintain telomere length mostly through telomerase^{1, 2, 3}. Telomerase activity is high in male germ line and stem cells, but is low or absent in mature oocytes and cleavage stage embryos, and then high again in blastocysts³. How early embryos reset telomere length remains poorly understood. Here, we show that oocytes actually have shorter telomeres than somatic cells, but their telomeres lengthen remarkably during early cleavage development. Moreover, parthenogenetically activated oocytes also lengthen their telomeres, thus the capacity to elongate telomeres must reside within oocytes themselves. Notably, telomeres also elongate in the early cleavage embryos of telomerase-null mice, demonstrating that telomerase is unlikely to be responsible for the abrupt lengthening of telomeres in these cells.

 

http://www.nature.com/ncb/journal/v9/n12/full/ncb1664.html

In addition to fake peer-reviewers, it seems we have false research to worry about. This recent Veritasium video explores the possibility of most published research being wrong. No wonder I never heard of a Pentaquark and I knew eating chocolate was never a good weight loss regime. Enjoy!

I wonder if it is a good idea to "integrity" test scientists like cops.

RANDOM INTEGRITY TESTING:

Random integrity tests are designed to observe and evaluate an officer’s conduct in situations in which a specific set of circumstances has been created that requires police intervention. Several major police departments, including the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), the New York City Police Department (NYPD), and the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD) routinely conduct random integrity tests of their officers to determine if their conduct in handling their official duties is appropriate.

There exist two schools of thought on this type of orchestrated integrity test. Many consider such action distasteful and unnecessary. Others argue that this type of testing is necessary to ensure that law enforcement officers do not abuse their powers and that the random testing of officers is a legitimate and necessary safeguard in maintaining integrity in a police organization. The purpose of this article is not to resolve the tension between these competing points of view, but instead to provoke discussion of the issues surrounding this process.

In the 1970’s, ABC News conducted an integrity test in Miami, where 31 wallets containing money and identification were turned over by role players to 31 police officers. Nine of the officers kept the money and were subsequently fired and/or prosecuted.

http://llrmi.com/articles/legal_update/le_integrity_tests.shtml

In my opinion, as a former research scientist (Biochemistry, Immunology, Molecular Genetics) I was under pressure to publish and put myself in a better position for a new short-term contract. I would, under normal conditions, prefer those experiments which supported my hypotheses rather than those that negated them. Of course my emphasis was on repeatability and reliability and I would explore and then mention anomalies whenever I saw them. I was a young idealist and would honestly report my results like the vast majority of scientists with whom I collaborated or communicated. Only one of my papers negated a hypothesis rather than supporting it but I did feel that more experiments should disprove hypotheses.

Not all research needs statistical proof, taking away one of the premises from the video. However, there is a need for researchers to rigorously test out the experiments of other researchers in their field. Confirming the findings of someone in your small area of a researcher (as a PhD or post-doc) is an excellent form of peer review. If the findings are not reproducible, then more papers should be retracted as a consequence. It is just ethical behaviour in my opinion.

My feelings for posting the OP were genuine. I wanted the studies on Near Death Experiences and Out of Body Experiences to succeed but the numbers are not yet high enough and the accounts of a unified ego watching operations were anecdotal. Science has some explanation for why people can feel that their bodies float or feel in a different place but I do not have the opinion that this is proof of what happens to those people who can see the top of the heads of their medical attendants and hear snatches of conversation. Even if objects or cards are placed around hospital surgeries on high shelves for a "disembodied" spirit to observe, and the occasional person identifies those object clearly, the mystery of soul or no soul will still remain a controversial area for scientists.

 

An opinion supported by any evidence?

Sure. If you count this article as evidence.

 

But when Archbishop Dr Rowan Williams suggested that Professor Darwin is often described as the world's most famous atheist, the geneticist responded: 'Not by me'.

He said: 'On a scale of seven, where one means I know he exists, and seven I know he doesn't, I call myself a six.'

Professor Dawkins went on to say he believed was a '6.9', stating: 'That doesn't mean I'm absolutely confident, that I absolutely know, because I don't.'

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2105834/Career-atheist-Richard-Dawkins-admits-fact-agnostic.html

Sorry, I came back a little late. hope that is satisfactory.

6.9/7=0.9857142857

From my phone calculator. you can round that up to 0.99 or 99%.

From what iNow has said, this was stated less dramatically in "The God Delusion" but I have not read the book so I am not able to make any other comment on it.

Uh, oh! I missed the latter part of iNow's reply which has ample evidence rather than the rehashed quotation from a "newspaper".

Some guys from my hometown-Glasgow, Scotland which is in the UK and also part of Europe.

 

 

In your case "the mainstream" is theism, I'm intrigued, how far can a theist stray from the mainstream?

 

 

That's the point of atheism, if god pops up we'll concede.

I don't know if mainstream is the right word but religious institutions are not for me. Too many people have been bogged down/dragged down by dogmatism and insistence on the rituals of religion. I want to worship an intelligence that can create a Universe with my tiny part in it. I don't think that there needs to be a priest as a middleman.

Fascinating topic. Do they smell the breath of the person and are the more sensitive dogs selected and then trained in an action when they smell outliers, e.g. to paw at the person?

We train Diabetes Assist Dogs to help people with Type I diabetes.

Diabetes Assist Dogs are trained to monitor smells in the air for a specific scent on the human breath that is related to rapidly dropping or low blood sugar levels. They are then trained to “alert” the person with diabetes, usually by touching them in a significant way such as pawing or nudging them. This alerts the person to check his or her blood sugar level. It also informs them that they should get something to eat to prevent hypoglycemia, or their blood sugars getting to a dangerous level. The canine partner can also be trained to retrieve juice or glucose tabs, get an emergency phone, or get help from another person in the house.

Diabetes Assist Dogs wear a backpack identifying them as an assistance dog. This backpack has pockets where medical information, a sugar source, and emergency contact information can be stored. This provides an extra safety net in case the person with diabetes is unable to get help in time. Anyone finding the person unconscious or acting abnormally would know it may be a medical emergency and know how to get help.

How can a dog detect low blood sugar?

The dogs are evaluated throughout “puppy-hood” for a willingness to work and a sensitive nose. Once we have identified their interest in smells, they begin scent training. A person experiencing hypoglycemia produces a particular scent, found on the breath, due to chemical changes in their body. All people produce the same scent when they have low blood sugar. Our training methods are similar to those used to train drug sniffing or search and rescue dogs trained to find people.

Due to the generosity of supporters like you all of our assistance dogs are provided to clients free of charge.

http://can-do-canines.org/ourdogs/diabetes-assist-dogs/

Hey guys,

 

I'm a relatively new member. I've come to find most of the normal members here to be a bunch of very laid back, easy going guys. I probably come across as kind of strange to some of you here. All I can say is that I'm sorry for that.

 

To the point, I see many threads here about religion, but none tackling the question of spirituality as it relates to atheism. Since I understand atheism to be mostly the rejection of claims that assert the existence of god(s), rather than the positive view that there is no supernatural realm or god(s). By this definition, I would consider myself an atheist. There are some popular atheists who claim to be highly spiritual (or at least interested in spiritual experience). Sam Harris comes to mind.

 

I just wanted to start up a conversation to see what the members here think. If you wouldn't mind, if you answer, please state where you stand as far as whether or not you are an atheist/theist/religious/non-religious/deist/etc.

 

I'm waiting to hear your views!

 

Thank God there's no reference to low intelligence I looked up the definition of "spiritual" on an American website, because you know that the UK and America are two countries divided by a common language, so I wanted to be certain that we are talking about the same thing. Here it is:

 

 

Simple Definition of spiritual

• : of or relating to a person's spirit

• : of or relating to religion or religious beliefs

• : having similar values and ideas : related or joined in spirit

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spiritual

I think that you know that I believe in a soul and that the soul, by its actions which affect others then reaches spiritual evolution through life until the final reward, or punishment. I am a Theist with personal opinions outside the mainstream.

Another opinion, no-one is wholly atheistic or totally a believer. Even Richard Dawkins is probably about 99% atheistic.

Interesting topic.