[HN Gopher] Can you inherit memories from your ancestors?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Can you inherit memories from your ancestors?
        
       Author : giuliomagnifico
       Score  : 63 points
       Date   : 2024-06-17 12:47 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.theguardian.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.theguardian.com)
        
       | ch4s3 wrote:
       | This is such an odd preoccupation of places like the guardian and
       | has a lot of the hallmarks of the discredited recovered memory
       | movement/therapy[1][2]. There's never any discussion of epigentic
       | changes that effect somatic cells vs gametes, or even of the
       | competing definitions of epigenetic changes.
       | 
       | Here's a quote from the article:
       | 
       | > Scientists working in the emerging field of epigenetics have
       | discovered the mechanism that allows lived experience and
       | acquired knowledge to be passed on within one generation
       | 
       | This is obviously such a nonsense interpretation of epigenetic
       | changes that it's hard to take anything in the article seriously.
       | 
       | Obviously there's real science happening around epigenetics and
       | there are interesting findings, reporting like this is a really
       | big leap.
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recovered-memory_therapy
       | 
       | [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/27/opinion/recovered-
       | memory-...
        
         | moralestapia wrote:
         | >This is obviously such a nonsense interpretation of epigenetic
         | changes that it's hard to take anything in the article
         | seriously.
         | 
         | No one (including you) really knows the whole extent of
         | epigenetic effects, so I would suggest you give it another
         | read.
         | 
         | We are still at (estimate) 10% known / 90% unknown in Biology.
         | Source: Biologist for 20 years now.
        
           | ch4s3 wrote:
           | I read the article, the linked study, and two studies citing
           | the linked study. The claim that memories or "lived
           | experience" is inherited is not supported by the study.
        
           | BenFranklin100 wrote:
           | Erm...memories -- by any biologically reasonable definition--
           | are separate from epigenetic changes. No serious researcher
           | would conflate the two, other than perhaps hippy-dippy
           | 'biologists' who struggled through 'Physics for Poets', as
           | undergrads. Source: Biophysicist for 30 years now.
        
             | moralestapia wrote:
             | And yet ...
             | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2248710/
             | 
             | Btw, read the site guidelines. This is a place for
             | discourse, not berating others.
        
               | ch4s3 wrote:
               | Follow up work has not held up the 2008 article you
               | shared[1], and has in fact shown that larvae do not carry
               | over memories through metamorphosis.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.quantamagazine.org/insect-brains-melt-
               | and-rewire....
        
               | BenFranklin100 wrote:
               | Further, even if the study had held up, there is a vast
               | difference between memories retained through an
               | individual metamorphosis event, and passing memories
               | along to offspring resulting from sexual reproduction.
               | The OP fails to recognize this obvious point.
        
               | ch4s3 wrote:
               | Yes, I completely agree.
        
               | moralestapia wrote:
               | >and has in fact shown that larvae do not carry over
               | memories through metamorphosis
               | 
               | Nope.
               | 
               | The 2008 study is _" the first to demonstrate
               | conclusively that associative memory survives
               | metamorphosis in Lepidoptera"_.
               | 
               | The article you cited does not disprove this, but rather
               | it shows the brain structure of (some, at least) insects
               | get completely re-arranged before/after their transition
               | to adulthood.
               | 
               | For me, this only makes the 2008 study _more_
               | interesting, since the memories could still persist, even
               | after a completely new brain architecture (!).
        
               | ch4s3 wrote:
               | That 2008 study has never been reproduced and the piece
               | in Quanta points towards it being impossible. Our current
               | understanding of memory is that it has a physical basis,
               | so that 2008 study is likely wrong.
        
               | BenFranklin100 wrote:
               | I'm not berating you. I'm ridiculing you. Anyone with an
               | actual 20 years experience as a biologist would not be
               | making such outlandish statements. From your profile, you
               | seem like more of an app developer than a genuine
               | biologist anyway.
        
               | moralestapia wrote:
               | This is definitely over the line.
               | 
               | cc @dang?
        
         | giantg2 wrote:
         | Eh, I mean what other explaination is there for "instinct". You
         | have genetic and epigenetic factors that give something a
         | predisposition to respond to stimuli in a specific way. Makes
         | sense to me, but it's just a theory (as most things are) and we
         | have a lot more to learn.
        
           | ch4s3 wrote:
           | There's a big difference between DNA methylation on gametes
           | leading to behavioral predispositions in offspring and the
           | claim that memories and experiences are inherited.
        
             | giantg2 wrote:
             | It depends on what you mean by memories. I'm not a fan of
             | the Guardian as I've seen stuff editorialized to the point
             | it conveys misinformation. This article is poorly written
             | to the point the writer doesn't seem to understand the
             | topic.
             | 
             | "Epigenetic memories" is different than colloquial
             | "memories". The article seems to completely miss this. And
             | of course people who haven't been exposed to that domain
             | specific concept are likely to misinterpret it.
        
               | everdrive wrote:
               | It's intentionally misleading given that "memory" has a
               | common understanding. If they simply wanted to keep the
               | article approachable, they could even just simply write
               | "they're analogous to memories, but don't work like
               | memory as most people understand it."
        
               | ch4s3 wrote:
               | Memory is the wrong word to use even like that. To the
               | extent that there is DNA methylation in gametes, it will
               | up or down regulate the expression of existing genes in
               | the DNA. Nothing is created de-novo as in memory, you
               | can't look at the resultant gene regulation and look
               | backwards to a cause.
        
               | giantg2 wrote:
               | Then please go tell all the publications and researcher
               | that they are wrong for using the term "Epigenetic
               | memory" in thier domain. Or are you a domain expert (in
               | the minority if you are)?
        
               | ch4s3 wrote:
               | The study[1] mentioned in the guardian does not contain
               | the phrase "epigenetic memory", and only contains the
               | word memory twice, and both uses are of the conventional
               | definition. The author in the guardian is misrepresenting
               | the science.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3923835/
        
               | giantg2 wrote:
               | I agree that the article is garage. The point of
               | contention is around epigenetic memory being a thing or
               | not. It is a common term used in the domain, such as in
               | this paper and others.
               | 
               | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7225062/
        
               | ch4s3 wrote:
               | You could probably replace the word memory in that paper
               | with maguffin and not change the meaning. It's totally
               | unconnected to the common definition or the use in
               | neurology. I guess what I'm getting at is that this kind
               | of reporting obscures what's going on intentionally for
               | the political aims of the guardian. Which I think is
               | lousy.
        
           | squidbeak wrote:
           | Instinct is totally different from memory.
        
             | ch4s3 wrote:
             | That's precisely the problem outside of the lack of any
             | direct evidence of the underlying mechanism.
        
             | conradolandia wrote:
             | How do you know?
        
             | giantg2 wrote:
             | Which "memory" are you talking about? "Epigenetic memory"
             | is different, and it's related to, and influences,
             | instinct.
        
           | HarHarVeryFunny wrote:
           | Well, you've got brain wiring that causes you to respond to
           | stimuli in a certain way. A small portion of that wiring is
           | genetic (e.g. opposite sex attraction, fear of heights,
           | disgust at certain smells), and the rest comes from prior
           | sensory exposure (i.e. is learnt during your own lifetime).
        
         | everdrive wrote:
         | Is there a good, real-world example of how we think epigenetics
         | works? I've seen a lot of mentions that "epigenetics _proves_
         | that intergenerational trauma is real!" -- and at least to my
         | eyes this feels like a stretch of the science. For instance,
         | why are epigenetic effects inherited? Why is it not the case
         | that in environment, the parents experience one environment and
         | so some genes are expressed. (ie, epigenetics happens based on
         | that environment) and then the children are in the a different
         | environment, and so different genes are expressed.
         | 
         | Do I have a wholly-incorrect understanding of epigenetics? Is
         | there a clear and simple example of an epigenetic mechanism?
        
           | gmm1990 wrote:
           | just look up dna methylation
        
             | everdrive wrote:
             | Thank you, I will do so.
        
           | ch4s3 wrote:
           | It seems pretty clear for example that being an alcoholic can
           | cause DNA methylation in your gametes such that your
           | offspring have a higher risk above and beyond regular genetic
           | factors to become an alcoholic. However that is at a
           | population level and there are complicating factors.
           | 
           | Inherited trauma is totally unsupported but up or down
           | regulated gene expression based on environmental factors
           | before your conception are supported by some compelling
           | evidence.
        
             | jvanderbot wrote:
             | I'm trying on a mental model re: Epigenetics. How does this
             | look:
             | 
             | Your genes are a recipe book, not a blueprint. What recipe
             | is chosen is based somewhat on environmental effects. When
             | you reproduce, you shuffle together the parents book + the
             | earmarks on the pages.
        
               | ch4s3 wrote:
               | I'm not sure if that totally fits. There's a kind of
               | signal amplification or de-amplification happening.
        
               | jvanderbot wrote:
               | Yeah I was using dogear as a way of signalling "prefer
               | this page"
        
               | ch4s3 wrote:
               | Yeah, I assumed that, but down regulating isn't well
               | captured in that metaphor.
        
             | margalabargala wrote:
             | > Inherited trauma is totally unsupported
             | 
             | This is only true if you take a pretty narrow definition of
             | the word "trauma".
             | 
             | One example would be an ancestor experiencing famine, who
             | then passes down epigenetic markers have marked effects on
             | their offspring in terms of health, longevity, and
             | behavior.
             | 
             | Here's a Nature article on it:
             | https://www.nature.com/articles/s41418-023-01159-4
             | 
             | > "Collectively, these discoveries infer the existence of
             | "a heritable memory of starvation/hunger"."
        
               | ch4s3 wrote:
               | The Dutch Hunger cohort study is highly suspect. However,
               | the idea that someone is literally starving to death just
               | before or during gestation having some knock on genetic
               | effects is not all that surprising. But again, the phrase
               | "inherited trauma", as it's typically used is bunk.
               | 
               | Also the phrase "a heritable memory" is kind of nonsense
               | even with respect to epigenetic changes. Again what we're
               | talking about with epigenetics is up or down regulation
               | of your existing genes, not some new information being
               | encoded.
        
           | biophysboy wrote:
           | The basic idea is that genome modifications can be inherited
           | with the genome. Methylation is one example; histone mods are
           | another. If you want specific examples, I'd recommend
           | focusing on a specific type of modification and searching
           | "fill-in-the-blank inheritance", to avoid the more dramatic
           | pop science.
        
         | ChuckMcM wrote:
         | Yeah but so many people _want_ to believe this idea. Consider
         | all the history of people of  "royal blood" as if that endeared
         | them with the knowledge and skills of ruling. There is a whole
         | industry that plays to this desire of people to "know". From
         | palmistry to genetic memory, they are all bonkers.
        
           | 47282847 wrote:
           | I can not look into my genes so I know nothing about that,
           | but what I can say with confidence is that trauma therapy
           | continues to fundamentally change how I judge, act and react,
           | and has deeply positive effects on all my relationships. I
           | can totally see how that positively influences how my
           | children will develop. That aspect of "passing on trauma" is
           | very real. I now stay calm and regulated in most stressful
           | situations, and in the few cases where I overreact I know how
           | to and I have the ability to (!) make up for it later and
           | correct my mistakes. And use the trigger to further heal past
           | pain.
        
             | rahimnathwani wrote:
             | The article is about genetic inheritance, not about
             | inheritance in general.
        
       | humansareok1 wrote:
       | Can memories be explicitly encoded in genes? If not then no. End
       | of the story.
        
         | ch4s3 wrote:
         | To the best of my understanding, no and I'm aware of any
         | proposed mechanism.
        
           | alkonaut wrote:
           | Isn't the article describing in depth how an experiment
           | showed it possible or did I completely misread it? It even
           | explained the mechanisms behind it?
        
             | ch4s3 wrote:
             | The article glosses over some details of a decade old
             | study, that might have maybe shown that some types of
             | conditioning using electrical shock might have epigenetic
             | effects that persist in gametes and effect later behavior.
             | The study attempts to show it indirectly and hand waves at
             | the mechanisms. It doesn't test for DNA methylation or
             | anything similar.
        
           | amelius wrote:
           | From TFA:
           | 
           | > The study made use of mice's love of cherries. Typically,
           | when a waft of sweet cherry scent reaches a mouse's nose, a
           | signal is sent to the nucleus accumbens, causing this
           | pleasure zone to light up and motivate the mouse to scurry
           | around in search of the treat. The scientists exposed a group
           | of mice first to a cherry-like smell and then immediately to
           | a mild electric shock. The mice quickly learned to freeze in
           | anticipation every time they smelled cherries. They had pups,
           | and their pups were left to lead happy lives without electric
           | shocks, though with no access to cherries. The pups grew up
           | and had offspring of their own.
           | 
           | > At this point, the scientists took up the experiment again.
           | Could the acquired association of a shock with the sweet
           | smell possibly have been transmitted to the third generation?
           | It had. The grandpups were highly fearful of and more
           | sensitive to the smell of cherries.
        
             | ch4s3 wrote:
             | I read the underlying study. It's pretty shy on
             | experimental details, and while an epigenetic change is the
             | possible mechanism they don't directly show that. It's also
             | a huge leap from the guardian article's claim that memories
             | are inherited.
        
               | moralestapia wrote:
               | They're not claiming that, though.
        
               | ch4s3 wrote:
               | The article includes this passage:
               | 
               | > Might this new understanding increase our capacity for
               | self-awareness and empathy? If we can grasp the potential
               | impact of our ancestors' experiences on our own
               | behaviour, might we be more understanding of others, who
               | are also carrying the inherited weight of experience?
               | 
               | They are literally refereeing to the concept of inherited
               | trauma and inter-generational memory throughout the
               | piece. It's a favorite hobby-horse of the guardian and
               | while they are somewhat subtle here and dress it up by
               | picking a very old study, they are in fact talking about
               | the kind of ideas appearing in popular self help books
               | like The Body Keeps the Score, and other things in their
               | orbit. The author of the article in question is hawking a
               | similar book on the guardian's books platform.
        
               | moralestapia wrote:
               | It has a question mark.
               | 
               | Claims don't have question marks.
        
               | ch4s3 wrote:
               | The whole article is full of similar statements, I just
               | found that short paragraph illustrative.
        
         | keithalewis wrote:
         | But never the end of clickbait.
        
         | dmd wrote:
         | Your understanding is half a century out of date.
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics
         | 
         | Note that I'm not claiming here that memories can be encoded in
         | genes; I'm also not making a strong claim here that memories
         | can be encoded epigenetically!
         | 
         | What I am arguing against is the claim that the only _possible_
         | method of transmission of traits is through DNA, which is what
         | parent comment said, and has been out of date for quite some
         | time.
        
           | humansareok1 wrote:
           | Oh yeah so you want to explain how Epigenetics can transfer
           | the memory of my Grandfathers 17th Birthday Party to my
           | brain?
        
             | jvanderbot wrote:
             | ELI5 attempt:
             | 
             | Your genes are a recipe book, not a blueprint. What recipe
             | is chosen is based somewhat on environmental effects. When
             | you reproduce, you pass on the book + the earmarks on the
             | pages.
             | 
             | In your comment, the word "Explicitly" is the controversial
             | part. Of course a memory cannot be _explicitly_ (like .mp4?
             | lol) encoded in genetics. But effects pass on, or so says
             | the field. It's the same as how the word "Memories" in the
             | title is doing a lot of hand-wavey hype generation. Can I
             | share a password or birthday party during intercourse? Of
             | course not.
        
               | humansareok1 wrote:
               | >Of course a memory cannot be _explicitly_ (like .mp4?
               | lol) encoded in genetics.
               | 
               | Indeed so the answer to the question: Can you inherit
               | memories from your ancestors? Is No. Full stop.
               | 
               | You want to talk about how the vibes during your
               | grandparents lives affected some obscure part of your
               | parents health then ok. But these things are completely
               | different.
        
               | moralestapia wrote:
               | >Can you inherit memories from your ancestors? Is No.
               | Full stop.
               | 
               | With our current knowledge, we cannot either prove or
               | disprove this.
        
               | jvanderbot wrote:
               | Yeah - so, if you want to be right about your takedown of
               | the title using narrow interpretations of "memories", you
               | probably can be.
               | 
               | But if you want a nuanced discussion of the article, we
               | should soften the gaze a little. That's all I'm saying.
        
           | Angostura wrote:
           | So, can you give any evidence or even point at a suggestion
           | that inheritable epigenetics can encode inheritable memories?
        
             | moralestapia wrote:
             | Not GP, but keep in mind that absence of evidence is not
             | evidence of absence.
             | 
             | We would still be cavemen with that attitude.
        
             | biophysboy wrote:
             | Its not a brain memory. The argument is that epigenetic
             | modifications can be inherited and thus the ancestor's
             | environment is "remembered". As for how long it lasts and
             | how much the memory is attenuated, well, that's another
             | matter.
        
         | passion__desire wrote:
         | "Nobody would suppose that the fact that human beings
         | everywhere always throw their spears pointy-end first shows
         | that there must be a gene for a pointy-end-first instinct." -
         | Daniel Dennett.
         | 
         | Counterpoint : "But, as Weiss discovered in a 2008 study, moths
         | and butterflies can retain memories from their time as
         | caterpillars, suggesting that the creatures' nervous system
         | remains during the transformation into a butterfly."
        
       | HPsquared wrote:
       | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3923835/
       | 
       | "Parental olfactory experience influences behavior and neural
       | structure in subsequent generations" (2014)
        
         | frutiger wrote:
         | > "Parental olfactory experience influences behavior and neural
         | structure in subsequent generations"
         | 
         | "[...in mice]"
        
       | prokopton wrote:
       | Fire up the Animus.
        
       | hliyan wrote:
       | Interesting! So basically: smell followed by electric shock (or
       | some other painful stimuli) -> demethylation of (already present,
       | but dormant?) gene that connects relevant olfactory receptor to
       | the amygdala?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-06-17 23:01 UTC)