Teresa's S/O and G/O hypothesis

Richard Aaron Warnock erawtech at leland.Stanford.EDU
Thu Mar 14 18:01:27 EST 1996

In article <4i9gin$ajr at decaxp.harvard.edu>,
Keith Robison <robison at mito.harvard.edu> wrote:
>Teresa Binstock (binstoct at essex.UCHSC.edu) wrote:
>: On 13 Mar 1996, Keith Robison wrote:
>: Teresa responds: 
>: 4. The link between ste2 and ste3 and human thymic epithelium is actual
>Please point out a reference which shows a link between ste2/3 and 
>human thymus GCRs; all of the citations you have listed appear to
>be general to the family, or specific to ste2/3 without reference
>to the human genes.  In particular, is there a special sequence
>relationship (quick check says no)?  Can the human genes complement
>yeast deficiencies?  What is it that makes you believe that there
>is more than a familial connection between the two proteins?

Keith, Teresa, et. al.,

The reason that she continues this less than promising thread is
because that her entire position is based on 1) little understanding,
2) faulty logic, and 3) a lack of basic effort to find any facts.

Your whole thesis, Teresa, is almost indecipherable. I retrieved it
from the Bionet archives, and read it. (Jan., 1996 dataset). If you
really want peer review, which I assume is why you posted it, you
should maybe state that. If you're just throwing something out there
like you want to corner the position as someone who's made a billiant
insight, well then, read the papers you cite, at the very least...

First off, you cannont make a thesis out of a random happenstance,
especially if you're gonna state things like "ii) with anecdotal data
indicating a higher than average rate of immuno-related traits within
pedigrees of HM(homosexual) of my acquaintance". 

Second, even if you could, you've got to know that there are the very
basic similarities that found your leap in logic. Here, you say that
ste2 and ste3 are on human epithelium. This is based on your medline
search with ste2 and ste3 as keywords that yielded:

1. Patel DD; Whichard LP; Radcliff G; Denning SM; Haynes BF.
     Characterization of human thymic epithelial cell surface antigens:
     phenotypic similarity of thymic epithelial cells to epidermal
   Journal of Clinical Immunology, 1995 Mar, 15(2):80-92.

Know what? If you'd actually read the article, you'd know that ste2
and ste3 in that article refer to antibodies agaist *Surface Thymic
Epithelium" undefined antigens, and not yeast alpha-receptors.

Kinda blows apart the whole thing, eh?

Additionally, Keith was absolutely right in everything he said about
7MSGPC receptors. If you'd bothered to do a simple blasttn search of
genebank with the protein sequence of ste alpha-receptor, you'd have
known right off that there's nothing remotely similar in humans
(previously identified) like ste2 and ste3. In fact, if you'd bothered
to check the GPC-Receptor database, you'd know that these actually
make up a wholly independent evalutionary branch of this super-family.

How do I know all this, I spent about 1/2hr at the med library. How
long has it taken you to type up all this junk?

All of this serves as an excellent example of why people get so dang
worked up about things like smallpox vaccine. They simply take a
little bit of information, with an incomplete understanding, and draw
an illogical conclusion. 

A word to the wise: spend less time on medline, and little more at the

"Nothing more is needed to destroy a man, than the conviction that his
life's work is useless."  -Antonin Artaud

erawtech at leland.stanford.edu (R. Aaron Warnock)

More information about the Immuno mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net