How to logically make sense of the human body:

[Ryan Rudolph]

It seems that the human body is probably one of the most complicated organic systems ever studied on the planet, and unlocking a more whole detailed picture of it will aid us to progress many areas such as medical and psychological treatment. And it seems that most health specialists do not yet fully understand the complexity of the human body. This is evident by the amount of side effects caused by drugs that are intended to treat a given condition. Moreover, it seems to me that many specialists may have a decent grasp of their local area of study, but because the overall knowledge base is so vast, they have a difficult time seeing how their local field of study interacts with other fields. For instance: how immunology interacts with endocrinology...

My questioning is based on how we should think of the human body, meaning how we should arrange its parts in our minds to make more sense of it, basically how should the parts of the body be grouped and categorized, as many of the contemporary groups in biology and medical texts are difficult to understand because they don't connect to each other as a comprehensive whole.

First of all, the mental and physical health of an individual seems to be partially governed by the higher order macro architecture of the body, which I think of as the major organs (specialized cells) , glands,, brain structure,, muscles, and so on. So the more optimal these structures are designed from the outset by preventing deficiencies, the greater the probability of physical and mental health. Moreover, how the higher order architecture behaves is based on certain genes that are activated or not activated during phases of development. Secondly, the next division that should be made is the molecules that work within the larger structures, IE: hormones, proteins, sugars, RNA and so on. Now the difficulty in understanding these relationships is that there are hundreds of thousands of different types of molecules that are all interacting and reacting in a fast microscopic environment which is an open system subject to variation, change and exceptions. For instance: Suppose a woman has a deficient thyroid gland, which is causing certain health and mental problems, and suppose we discover the exact thyroxin quantity necessary to stabilize her body through experimentation, that number or quantity may not be the actual magic number if she exhibited ideal conditions. Because perhaps her thyroid gland has a high number inactive receptor sites on the cell walls of the thyroid cells, so more of the hormone is needed to get the same effect because much of it cannot be properly utilized by the gland itself.

Now if we make these two groupings:

Macro structures: organs, cells, brain structures, muscles, skeleton.
Micro structures: Molecules such as hormones, proteins, RNA, and so on.

So how should the body be divided from there?

And if there are any genetics experts out there, please tell me if these assumptions about how genes behave are correct or not:

1.Genes govern developmental growth early in life at certain phases such as the growth and organization of brain cells, or the growth of the glands and organs, and growth of sexual characteristics.
2.Genes govern the quantity of molecules produced in each cell.
3.Molecules are the work horses of the cell, but the overall health of the cell is necessary for normal functioning.
4.The different types of RNA and the different organelles are necessary to perform tasks inside the cell, and are necessary to engage with the genes (DNA) to cause it to manufacture new molecules.

[JohnEDPMalin]

rRyan:

I am shocked that no one has taken you up on this question.

You already did a good layered approach to the body.

And think, you did not deal with Cell chemical signaling [See Science, 17 october 2008, "Feedback Loops Shape Cellular Signals in Space and Time" p. 390 by Onn Brandman and tobias Meyer].

The metabolic pathway (all 5,000 chemical reactions) and the sequence-specificity atlas of the kinase world or protein kinases enzymes that mediate cellular decision processes [human genome encodes 518 protein kinases (targets of the kinome)].

Don't forget our body is composed of 100 billion cells that are us; we carry other organisms to the tune of 900 billion of these creatures in us and on us. I think I have my order of magnitude correct here! But check on me. It is a little over a trillion cells and single cell organisms in and on us.

However, I would organize the human body from the stand point of Information (50%), Matter (25%) and Energy (25%). James Miller's treatise "The Living System". Think of Matter and Energy exchanges as the matrix, and information as the mirror of this matrix.

However, you are quite correct in your approach. Biochemistry and cellular metabolism must be the foundational knowledge of medical science!

The old model of cell, tissue, organelle, organ and organism is too simplistic. It won't cut it at the level of scale and granularity of our technology tools today.

It is fashionable to assert the holistic model, but as you correctly stated that is too nebulous of a model.


Respectfully,


John E.D.P. Malin

--

[Philosophaster]

This is evident by the amount of side effects caused by drugs that are intended to treat a given condition.

Side effects don't always indicate a lack of knowledge on the part of drug designers. They are sometimes inevitable because a drug addresses a chemical pathway that has multiple functions in the body, or makes multiple proteins / hormones; for example, statins and osteoclast-inhibitors both address the HMG-CoA reductase pathway.

[JohnEDPMalin]

Philosophaster:

Excellent point to Ryan.

I see you have taken your biochemical coursework, and know the metabolic pathways!

When we took our biochemistry coursework for pleasure at our local university, we were surprise how many pre-medical doctors detested biochemistry. It was viewed as something one had to get through. It was taken two or three times before they could get an A grade in the coursework. We found this strange. Buiochemistry is inherently fascinating and brilliant in its organization of the most complex series of knowledge ever assimilated by mankind.

It presently is the metaphor for our social-communications technologies as contained in the cell signaling net systems alluded to in our blog to Ryan.

Respectfully,


John E.D.P. Malin

--