Jacks Complete
November 7th, 2006, 08:52 AM
Strange but true.
From New Scientist paper edition, 3rd of June 2006, letters page:
Mighty Chimps
From Simon Brinstngl
The article on agression in chimpanzees decribes how adult chimps attacked and overpoewred humans with ease (6 May, p.14). I have read that chimps can be 6 times stronger than humans, though I am unclear what exactly is meant by the quatinifcation: is it weight-for-weight, for example? Are they bigger, more muscular, fitter, or is there something intrinsically different about their muscles?
Given teh similarity of our genomes it would be interesting if small changes in genes or how they are expressed could create such a difference.
The editor replies:
Chimpanzees are different from humans in several obvious ways, one of which is their sheer physical strength. But why are they so much stronger than us?
The answer is not just greater muscle bulk. It is also to do with that fact that their muscles work five to seven times more effeicently than ours. Studies of human and other primates' jaw mascules show that our muscle fibres are far smaller and weaker than those of our cousins - roughly one-eighth the size of those seen in macaques, for example.
The reason for this remains poorly understood, but one contributing factor is in the genes that encode myosin, the protein from which muscle fibres are made. Comparision of human and ape sequences for a myosin gene called MYH16 show that all humans have a mutant version of this gene. Some have even creditied the more diminutive muscles in human jaws for our larger intelligence. One theory says that these smaller muscles gave our skulls more room to grow rounder, allowing for a bigger brain cavity.
Now, this raises an few interesting ideas. The most obvious one is for someone to have a go at using (fairly basic) gene therapy on someone with a muscle wasting disease, and setting them up with the "normal" MYH16 gene. If it doesn't kill them dead, but gives them the ability to lift trucks, then we are in with a good chance of being able to take a shot in the arm that leaves us 6 times stronger!
Now, logically, this could have some issues, such as snapping your own bones due to the added power you can apply, and tendons, etc. would also have issues. However, I think this would be mitigated by the effects of the new gene only causing new muscle built after the therapy to be more powerful. This would mean that huge body builders would not be able to be nearly as strong as those who were skinny to start with, and then worked out.
If this were true, then the rest of the body would have time to adapt itself to the new stresses being applied, and, for instance, your bones would lay down more caluim and become slowly stronger, as your strength increases.
The risks? This treatment might kill you dead, and even if not, it shouldn't be used under the age of 25, when everything has stopped growing. If it changed heart muscle, you might have heart issues, but that is a different type of muscle, so it might not be an issue.
If it was something you simply had to learn to live with, I'd certainly go for it, though. Even just double my strength would be a neat trick. And the upper limit? Well, orangutans don't work out much, but there are reported cases of them picking up fallen trees one handed!
Any biologists out there?
From New Scientist paper edition, 3rd of June 2006, letters page:
Mighty Chimps
From Simon Brinstngl
The article on agression in chimpanzees decribes how adult chimps attacked and overpoewred humans with ease (6 May, p.14). I have read that chimps can be 6 times stronger than humans, though I am unclear what exactly is meant by the quatinifcation: is it weight-for-weight, for example? Are they bigger, more muscular, fitter, or is there something intrinsically different about their muscles?
Given teh similarity of our genomes it would be interesting if small changes in genes or how they are expressed could create such a difference.
The editor replies:
Chimpanzees are different from humans in several obvious ways, one of which is their sheer physical strength. But why are they so much stronger than us?
The answer is not just greater muscle bulk. It is also to do with that fact that their muscles work five to seven times more effeicently than ours. Studies of human and other primates' jaw mascules show that our muscle fibres are far smaller and weaker than those of our cousins - roughly one-eighth the size of those seen in macaques, for example.
The reason for this remains poorly understood, but one contributing factor is in the genes that encode myosin, the protein from which muscle fibres are made. Comparision of human and ape sequences for a myosin gene called MYH16 show that all humans have a mutant version of this gene. Some have even creditied the more diminutive muscles in human jaws for our larger intelligence. One theory says that these smaller muscles gave our skulls more room to grow rounder, allowing for a bigger brain cavity.
Now, this raises an few interesting ideas. The most obvious one is for someone to have a go at using (fairly basic) gene therapy on someone with a muscle wasting disease, and setting them up with the "normal" MYH16 gene. If it doesn't kill them dead, but gives them the ability to lift trucks, then we are in with a good chance of being able to take a shot in the arm that leaves us 6 times stronger!
Now, logically, this could have some issues, such as snapping your own bones due to the added power you can apply, and tendons, etc. would also have issues. However, I think this would be mitigated by the effects of the new gene only causing new muscle built after the therapy to be more powerful. This would mean that huge body builders would not be able to be nearly as strong as those who were skinny to start with, and then worked out.
If this were true, then the rest of the body would have time to adapt itself to the new stresses being applied, and, for instance, your bones would lay down more caluim and become slowly stronger, as your strength increases.
The risks? This treatment might kill you dead, and even if not, it shouldn't be used under the age of 25, when everything has stopped growing. If it changed heart muscle, you might have heart issues, but that is a different type of muscle, so it might not be an issue.
If it was something you simply had to learn to live with, I'd certainly go for it, though. Even just double my strength would be a neat trick. And the upper limit? Well, orangutans don't work out much, but there are reported cases of them picking up fallen trees one handed!
Any biologists out there?