Myostatin Mutation

[Orleander]

Would this beef be safe to eat since the mutation is natural? And why aren't we using this mutation on people?


Originating in 19th century Belgium by crossing local cattle with British cattle, the Belgian Blue cattle are gigantic bovine wonders. Their enormous size and muscle mass, sometimes called "double muscling," is a naturally occurring mutation of the gene for myostatin, a protein that regulates muscle growth. This mutation results in accelerated lean muscle growth.

 

[Grim_Reaper]

I would have to say yes it would be safe to eat and would likely taste pretty good.

 

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Would this beef be safe to eat since the mutation is natural?

I don’t see why not.

BTW, I think the phrase “natural mutation” is somewhat of a tautology. In other words, what’s a “natural mutation” as opposed to an “un-natural mutation”?

And why aren't we using this mutation on people?

What do you mean? How do you propose to induce this precise mutation in people?

 

[Orleander]

I don’t see why not.

BTW, I think the phrase “natural mutation” is somewhat of a tautology. In other words, what’s a “natural mutation” as opposed to an “un-natural mutation”?

natural happens on its own. Not man-man. Kinda like raspberry vs a boysenberry

What do you mean? How do you propose to induce this precise mutation in people?

LOL, I don't know, I'm not in the medical field. But wouldn't it help people with muscle diseases or injuries?

 

[technetium]

The mutation may be "natural" i.e not the result of human-induced genetic manipulation, but that doesn't mean its harmless to humans.

The mutation that first produced venom in a snake or the poison on the skin of a Dart frog was certainly natural, but neither is very safe to humans.

In this case I'd be happy to give our mammilian cousin the taste test, given our relatively close bio-chemistry.

 

[Pandaemoni]

Most mutations are harmless. That said, the notion that a domesticated animal, after millennia of selective breeding, are subject to entirely random mutations seems off to me. Gigantism is common in other species bred by man (the Liger comes to mind). There's nothing natural about the liger.

There certainly is no reason to believe that a natural mutation is "healthier" than an induced one. Bear in mind that all cow meat, mutated or not, is dissolved in a pit hydrochloric acid before our body makes use of the constituent molecules.

 

[visceral_instinct]

I want that mutation.

 

[Stryder]

If the mutation is protein induced, such with this defined mutation I would suggest there is the potential for cross species mutation through ingestion. This doesn't mean that as soon as you eat a burger you are going to bare muscles like the Popeye character with his spinnach, but over a long duration of eating that particular food source your would make yourself and potentially your future offspring more likely to gain the mutation. (It might of course take many generations eating the same foodsource to muster.)

This is actually one of the major concerns with artificially induced hormones in both beef stock and dairy producing cattle.

 

[Orleander]

If the mutation is protein induced, such with this defined mutation I would suggest there is the potential for cross species mutation through ingestion....

so if dogfood is made form parts of these animals long enough, they might bulk up?

 

[technetium]

If the mutation is protein induced, such with this defined mutation I would suggest there is the potential for cross species mutation through ingestion.

My crude understanding is that the DNA in the cells of the animal holds the "code" or recipe for creating amino acids and proteins, which ultimately
build the animal. Mutations are changes in the DNA which alter this recipe and may produce new amino acid combinations and thus new proteins which may manifest themselves as say blue eyes, short limbs etc.

I'm not aware of proteins or amino acids being able to "work backwards" to alter DNA - that would render the protein a carcinogen or mutagen, wouldn't it? Certainly I don't think any protein could "re-program" the DNA code to make copies of itself. I know viruses can do something silimar but there's a big difference.

Your explanation sounds a bit like Lamarckism which I thought had been largely discredited for over than a century.

Can you direct me to any references to backup what you're suggesting or can anyone else help clarify this matter?

 

[technetium]

If the mutation is protein induced, such with this defined mutation I would suggest there is the potential for cross species mutation through ingestion.

My crude understanding is that the DNA in the cells of the animal holds the "code" or recipe for creating amino acids and proteins, which ultimately
build the animal. Mutations are changes in the DNA which alter this recipe and may produce new amino acid combinations and thus new proteins which may manifest themselves as say blue eyes, short limbs etc.

I'm not aware of proteins or amino acids being able to "work backwards" to alter DNA - that would render the protein a carcinogen or mutagen, wouldn't it? Certainly I don't think any protein could "re-program" the DNA code to make copies of itself. I know viruses can do something silimar but there's a big difference.

Your explanation sounds a bit like Lamarckism which I thought had been largely discredited for over than a century.

Can you direct me to any references to backup what you're suggesting or can anyone else help clarify this matter?

 

[Idle Mind]

My crude understanding is that the DNA in the cells of the animal holds the "code" or recipe for creating amino acids and proteins, which ultimately
build the animal. Mutations are changes in the DNA which alter this recipe and may produce new amino acid combinations and thus new proteins which may manifest themselves as say blue eyes, short limbs etc.

I'm not aware of proteins or amino acids being able to "work backwards" to alter DNA - that would render the protein a carcinogen or mutagen, wouldn't it? Certainly I don't think any protein could "re-program" the DNA code to make copies of itself. I know viruses can do something silimar but there's a big difference.

Your explanation sounds a bit like Lamarckism which I thought had been largely discredited for over than a century.

Can you direct me to any references to backup what you're suggesting or can anyone else help clarify this matter?

There are proteins that can pass an irregular conformation on to otherwise regular proteins through contact alone -- prions are an example of this. BSE, or mad cow, is probably the most famous example of this, but there are others.

This is not the case with our current topic of discussion, which is a mutation in the gene for the myostatin protein.

 

[Asguard]

umm stryder thats a bit of a strech concidering the gut is specifically designed to STOP that happerning (ie protines are NOT surposed to enter the blood stream, only fatty acids which they are made up of are). There are some exceptions to this (as idle said) but as far as i know (and i could be wrong) prions are tiny, rather than full blown protines.

 

[visceral_instinct]

so if dogfood is made form parts of these animals long enough, they might bulk up?

I want that canine! I'd name him something cool like Angel or Saber.

 

[John Connellan]

Would this beef be safe to eat since the mutation is natural? And why aren't we using this mutation on people?

Whether it is natural or not, it is obviously still safe to eat the beef. It's the same beef that you always eat just more of it!

It's not as if it was a mutation that produces toxins within the meat or something

 

[Orleander]

so like it would be ok for a cannibal to eat an average person and an person with Down Syndrome. There is a mutation, but it wouldn't affect the eater...right?

 

[John Connellan]

so like it would be ok for a cannibal to eat an average person and an person with Down Syndrome. There is a mutation, but it wouldn't affect the eater...right?

It wouldn't affect the eater in a more harmful way, no. However, there is a slight difference between these 2 scenarios.

The mutation in the cattle is one which might make it even better to eat - better quality muscle.

Since Down Syndrome people are prone to muscle hypotonia, a cannibal might not prefer the flesh to that of a human without Down's. That is purely a matter of taste though and eating the Down's flesh should certainly do no more harm than eating regular flesh.

 

[Orleander]

How is more muscle better quality muscle?

 

[John Connellan]

How is more muscle better quality muscle?

It's not just more muscle but a higher density of fibres and less fat etc...

don't know about you but in my experience, the best cuts of steak are the leanest

 

[Orleander]

well, in my experience the best cuts of meat have more fat...more marbleing.