STUDY - Technical - New Dacian's Medicine
How
it Works... Our "Body" (3).
Translation Draft
According to the theory of systems, already discussed in previous posts, each level of biological integration represents a set of phenomena, interconnected and interconditional structures between which certain laws of operation are established. Thus, the system would not be viable if its elements were not consistent. The cell, the fundamental structural-functional unit of the living, owes its existence to its component elements (chromosomes, ribosomes, mitochondria, etc.), elements between which all these relationships are established, causing the system to function coherently, logically.
According to the theory of systems, already discussed in previous posts, each level of biological integration represents a set of phenomena, interconnected and interconditional structures between which certain laws of operation are established. Thus, the system would not be viable if its elements were not consistent. The cell, the fundamental structural-functional unit of the living, owes its existence to its component elements (chromosomes, ribosomes, mitochondria, etc.), elements between which all these relationships are established, causing the system to function coherently, logically.
This form of manifestation has continuity both at the level of the organs and at the level of the whole that materializes in an organism (without "going" to the scale of the Universe). Let's see now, some "details" related to the known "unparticularities" related to the "formation" (and others) of organs!
In an attempt to demonstrate the evolution of the set of laws underlying multicellular organisms (human default), multiple theories have developed in which the evolution due to genetic mutations is noted. Modern theories demonstrate more and more clearly, more undeniably, that these genetic mutations are, in fact, a direct result of adaptation to the environment in which life manifests itself and, why not, to the way of collaboration (including communication) necessary for evolution in that environment.
And, the first landmark in these "demonstrations" is how cell differentiation takes place in different organs (of which I wrote "some" in previous posts). L. Watson cites experiments on frog embryos that replaced the tissues sketching the upper limbs with those sketching the lower limbs. Nature could not be fooled because all embryos were born with the body completely, unchanged (in our case to have 4 "legs" and no "hand").
So, if the cell's genetic information had already begun to foreshadow future organs, what new factor emerged in its reorientation? From what I have presented previously (stem cell experiments conducted by Bruce Lipton), it can be inferred that the indicative element in cell differentiation would be "zone chemistry". But, "chemistry" (direct structure of the development environment), in turn, why is it determined?
Being forced to perform the function of another organ that has been surgically removed from the body, many of the organs of the human body sketch an anatomical remodeling similar to the organ we replace.
It ultimately requires a genetic adaptation (additional to several "back-up" mechanisms - which I will discuss much later). Thus, a 3/4 stomach removed is able to recover functionally almost entirely. Moreover, everyone knows the role of peristaltic movements in mobilizing food in the digestive tract. The meaning of these movements is the gravitational one, from top to bottom, only by accident happens the other way around. But in operations to replace the esophagus with another consisting of the large curvature of the stomach, it adapts to its new function and adopts a reverse peristaltic movement. Is this behavior attributed to the fact that it responds to the nervous system?
The nervous system can only control the functionality of the body through structures adapted to the functions. There's no way the kidney could digest, and the stomach would see... So, a readjustment of the organ to a new function requires a new genetic information that restructures everything by giving functionality to the "new format". And if this is obtained only by chance, how could it be explained as a rule and not as a fluke? This is only an undesirable alternative, unfavorable to the doctor's intention. Besides, surgeons understand the body correctly when they operate, and that's to the chance of the sick. They rely on the "intelligence of nature", on the own resources, existing in each organism to adapt its functionality and even its form to the new conditions imposed by life.
By extending these forms of "adaptation" (collaboration, intercorrelation, etc.) they can present some elements about the "cohabiting nations" of an organism, addressing an "example" of the world of microbes. Trying to explain the phenomenon of adaptation of microbes to antibiotics and to understand the rapidity with which resistant forms are created, which is also true for other forms of "resistance" (opposed by us to a parasitic world), we find that phenomena do not occur at random, but have a perfect internal logic. Thus, life will "approach" new structures that give it continuity, the "facet" of resistance. So there will be a new genetic mutation, any structure assuming its own genetic information, which did not exist previously. Who causes these mutations?
From our point of view, the change in living conditions is the factor that has actually attracted the respective genetic mutations. Consequently, the cell, according to a "own" logic, which allowed it to resist over time, has created a survival mechanism that it permanently "enrolls" at the genetic level to be passed on and thus ensure the perpetuation of "accumulated information". There is no need (if we do not like) to invoke a supernatural force, a "primary impulse", or the fact that the Universe is "tuned" to sustain life, but, very simply, to see in these adaptive reactions the expression of the general law of the living, "forced" to organize itself in such a way as to adapt and integrate to the environment.
We can see in this adaptation the expression of an intelligent response to the environment, of a system capable of evolution. If our species did not contain, in itself, the possibility of adapting to new environmental conditions, it would have long since perished. Besides, such coping mechanisms distinguish at every step. The whole life of a being means nothing but a practice (and, why not, improvement) of "adaptive baggage" and a continuous and incessant adaptation: to cold and hot, to effort and rest, to new and new psychological conditions of stress, to the beauty of life and to its inevitable sufferings. For all these circumstances there are well-defined mechanisms that allow the being to survive.
But let's get back to the body and organs! I will now make a comparison between an organism and an "organism" made up of organisms. These are colonies of bees or ants that "manufacture" their "desire", as needed, from the same genetic source (there are no different queens for "different products"), members with different morphology and functionality: queens, nannies, workers, drones, soldiers, etc. Here is the example of an "organism" that creates its "organs" as needed, according to the "functionality" necessary for the operation of the "organism". Obviously, in humans, this analogy would seem forced. But let's see "closer" what it's all about! In the case of a hive (or an anthill) we have, as in the case of the human body, some limited possibilities of the "space" of that hive.
Thus, if the hive is placed in an environment assaulted by predators (or enemies), the determinism of the situation will attract the increase of the population of soldiers. But they do not produce and consume additional resources. The reaction of the hive 'organism' will be to increase the working population in order to be able to supplement the additional supply requirements. But, as I was saying, the hive has "limits." If the environment is "permissive" over time, the possibility of increasing the hive may arise to allow balance and survival in that environment.
If not, the hive goes. If he goes, the accumulated information is lost, even genetically inscribed. If it survives, i.e. if the "organism" has time to increase the hive and thus resist the environment, the future colonies "founded" by the "new" queens will seek to exploit the information and quickly "achieve" new hives that have the maximum "accumulated" informational dimensions, even if the initial population is numerically inferior and seems that the hive in question is far too large. Thus an architecture appears that has an internal logic, corresponding to its vital and perpetuating needs, completely changed, manifested by "concomitant interventions" necessary to change the whole whole.
Something quite similar "appears" in humans. Under certain conditions of new demand to "strengthen" and increase our muscle mass, or intellectual capacity, we are dealing with "enlarged liver" or "enlarged spleen", and many, many other "landmarks". All this tries to solve "adaptive" adaptation to the environment, to give a specific answer, be it pathological (according to current medicine). But, after all, not least, a human body needs only and only needs adaptation to the environment. And, the information that will be genetically transmitted to the offspring is the one that will allow such adaptation that the "applicant" environmental factors are no longer "applicants".
An example of this would be the research of E.A. Pora which recounts an eloquent observation for this discussion. He tracked the changes that the bodies of aquatic animals in Lake Eforie have undergone over nearly 200 years. This lake broke away from the Black Sea by interposing a portion of sand between the two waters. The salinity of the water has increased greatly compared to that of the sea by the discharge of salt sludge debris from Lake Techirghiol. The living things that remained in the lake acquired new characteristics, different from its black sea, both in resistance to increased salinity and morphological aspect, requiring their classification in new species. Here is the effect of adaptation "allowed" by evolution over time and by transmitting information to future generations, genetic mutation being only a means of achieving adaptation, thus a second factor, first of all being the need to continue life in the new environment.
So what else can I say about the "accumulation" of cells in an organ and, finally, in an organism?!? It is obvious that everything is subject to evolution in the sense of adaptation. And, there are many questions that arise that current sciences cannot answer. If biological evolution implies the emergence of a higher organism organized in relation to its predecessor, then we cannot explain the presence of more perfected structures to previous "unevolved" forms. Expressed more concretely. if man is the last "acquisition" of evolution, his last link and, therefore, the most perfected form he has reached, then, taking only one example of the many existing, how does the "evolution" of such a weak olfaction in man in relation to that of the dog be explained?
Many of our biological possibilities seem "involated", if we take as a starting point their representation in other beings that precede us evolutionaryly, even at the level of the same human species. In our "current" case, neither vision, hearing nor digestion nor immunity achieve the performance encountered at "other biological levels". As for the transmission of information to "followers, I will ask a naïve question: by what miracle have occurred the "adaptations to the environment" that have resulted in the appearance at the same time of a male and a female, head is serial for a new species, equipped with congruent sexual organs, perfectly adapted to each other as structure and function in order to be able to perpetuate and evolve the new species.
We therefore find that the objective of life, of evolution, does not seem to be totality but functionality, not the performance of the parts but the finality of the whole. Wherever it needed an ingenious solution to achieve a intended effect, nature found it and materialized it without taking into account the contradiction of the term evolution and, here, even the manifestations generically referred to as "disease"...
I have another "logical" conclusion to present here... As we climb new evolutionary steps, the cells remain the same as function, but are organized into newer, more complex forms. The nervous system appears as a new structure, "focused" on the processing of information, perfected and structured in "evolutionary floors" of which, the newest is "gifted" with the most complex functionality, becoming also the support of consciousness. This creates the impression that biological evolution would have had no purpose other than to perfect the forms of information processing, from the compulsion of primary structures to the freedom of thought detached from matter and raised to the height of the spirit. This is the meaning of evolution that logical string requires: perfecting forms capable of processing information to the complexity of human thought.
And, more recently, more and more evidence of the body-mind-spirit triad is emerging. Quantum tubes at the neural level, the real and palpable responses obtained in the teta or delta states of functioning of the brain that no longer have any kind of disjunction from the notion of the spirit of "deep subconscious". Basically, it seems that the "spirit" sculpts its forms in matter capable of expressing it. Viewed in this way, evolution requires us to take the new steps necessary to take on Earth in order to reach the perception of the reality and essence of this spirit.
And, I've got plenty more to present... But not today...
Love, Gratitude and Understanding!
Dorin, Merticaru