quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad
Certain genes are known from statistics to be strongly correlated with certain behaviors, which is why a prominent ethicist has already said it would be immoral not to use genetic engineering to cull violence as a trait from humanity altogether.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Okay, mandatory psych eval to purchase a gun... What about the people with no history that just snap and go a little psycho and shoot up a mall or something?

quote:

Really, the most fascinating psychological/biological/name-your-science question here is not why such killings occur occasionally, it's why more screwed-up. testosterone- and fantasy- fuelled young men do not *more regularly* go around blasting the shit out of people around them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Well, how can there be an understanding without research? Control groups and double blinds will follow in time . . when enough data is gathered to formulate questions and hypothoses.

The discussion in this thread is about finding a genetic cause for Lanza's behaviour, which is the reason Connecticut University want to study Lanza's genes for mental illness, which is as good as impossible.

If they think they are going to find genetic markers for mental illnesses, they don't need Lanza's genetic tissue because it will tell them nothing they can't find out from other sources and one subject will tell them absolutely nothing. All I can think of is that Connecticut University are involved in a publicity stunt which does their institution no favours when it comes to their peers.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

I think Kirata gave you a good answer in #61. If you read the article carefully you will find this comment:

"By studying genetic abnormalities we can learn more about conditions better and who is at risk and what might be dramatic treatments," Beaudet said, adding if the gene abnormality is defined the "treatment to stop" other mass shootings or "decrease the risk is much approved."

Thanks for the reference. I posted that because I am growing suspicious of anti-depressants as a recurring theme in these killings. It is possible that certain people should not be treated with these classes of drugs, and if that's the case then a genetic marker that allows us to spot them would certainly be welcome.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


Maybe there's a better place to look. Reviewing some other multiple-victim shootings...

• An autopsy concluded that Columbine killer Eric Harris had the SSRI antidepressant Fluvoxamine in his bloodstream at the time of his death.
http://acolumbinesite.com/eric.html

• Jeff Weise, who killed nine people and himself at a Minnesota high school in 2005, was taking increasingly high doses of Prozac at the time of his spree.
http://www.murderpedia.org/male.W/w/weise-jeffrey.htm

• Robert Hawkins, who killed eight people and himself at an Omaha mall in 2007, reportedly “had been on antidepressants” at the time of his shooting.
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/12/06/omaha.shooting/

• Seung-Hui Cho, who killed 32 and wounded 23 at Virginia Tech in 2007, had been prescribed Prozac and had previously taken Paxil for a year, but he apparently had ceased taking his medication at the time of the shooting.
http://www.wnd.com/2007/04/41218/

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Well, how can there be an understanding without research? Control groups and double blinds will follow in time . . when enough data is gathered to formulate questions and hypothoses.

The discussion in this thread is about finding a genetic cause for Lanza's behaviour, which is the reason Connecticut University want to study Lanza's genes for mental illness, which is as good as impossible.

If they think they are going to find genetic markers for mental illnesses, they don't need Lanza's genetic tissue because it will tell them nothing they can't find out from other sources and one subject will tell them absolutely nothing. All I can think of is that Connecticut University are involved in a publicity stunt which does their institution no favours when it comes to their peers.

You are fixated on the delusion that Lanza is the only killer to be studied. I think Kirata gave you a good answer in #61. If you read the article carefully you will find this comment:

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

Really, the most fascinating psychological/biological/name-your-science question here is not why such killings occur occasionally, it's why more screwed-up. testosterone- and fantasy- fuelled young men do not *more regularly* go around blasting the shit out of people around them.

So, with so many guns but not as many kill incidents as you would expect, this is not a gun issue but a mental health issue. Is that your point?

I might agree with that.

quote:

Study as many killers as you want, our knowledge of genetics is not anywhere near up to determining if mental illness is caused through genentics or not or if it is, what triggers it. The idea is probably stupid in the first place and probably illustrates our ignorance more than it illustrates our knowledge, especially when you consider single genes don't appear in themselves to govern anything but their networking with other genes. There doesn't appear to be any central points for any particular thing like there doesn't seem to be a central point in our consciousness leaving scientists to realise, the more they know, the more there is to know and what they do know, is not very much.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

I take it from the above statement that your position is because we are ignorant of something we should not pursue knowledge of it. Really? And because it is a dumb idea we should leave it alone? Really? How fortunate we are that Jenner pursued his observation and that the Wright Brothers did not have meatcleaver as their adviser.

What a dumbass position you have staked out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

I take it from the above statement that your position is because we are ignorant of something we should not pursue knowledge of it. Really? And because it is a dumb idea we should leave it alone? Really? How fortunate we are that Jenner pursued his observation and that the Wright Brothers did not have meatcleaver as their adviser.

What a dumbass position you have staked out.

Your position and the position of Connecticut University is dishonest because wanting to research Lanza's DNA is nothing to do with learning about genetics but about using science as an excuse for sensationalist porn because nothing can be learnt about his behaviour from his genes due to the lack of knowledge we have about how genes might or might not influence behaviour. The whole point of using Lanza's DNA is an excuse to jack off over a killer and his deeds because nothing useful could come from this particular research and that is about as near as a fact as anyone can predict.

Which is where I came in when on one thread I said most emotional reactions to Lanza's masacre was more to do with ersatz emotion and this thread and the threads on guns more or less proves me right.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

~FR~
For those of a medieval mindset who think there can be no connection between the human genome and aberrant behaviour syndromes, the following is offered:
Excessive Protein Synthesis Linked to Autistic-Like Behaviors, Neuroscientists Find

The researchers focused on the EIF4E gene, whose mutation is associated with autism. The mutation causing autism was proposed to increase levels of the eIF4E, the protein product of EIF4E, and lead to exaggerated protein synthesis. Excessive eIF4E signaling and exaggerated protein synthesis also may play a role in a range of neurological disorders, including fragile X syndrome (FXS).

snort!

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver
The chances are behaviour will end up being to biologists what time is to physicist, everyone has heard of it, everyone thinks they know what it is but no one has enough understanding of it to explain exactly what it is or how it works.