Skip to content
(From The Jewish Center for Torah-Related Emipirical Research (JeCTER), a subsidiary of Jewish Matters Outreach Incorporated)
Tracing the Origin of Transposons In Sexually Reproducing Organisms
The story is similar from one species of sexually reproducing organisms to another. But let us see how it applies particularly to humans.
In humans, the female egg cell, called primary oocyte, stops all development and becomes dormant in female fetus several months before the female child is born. Then at puberty, the egg cell resumes development, after receiving stimulation from hormones. But during the dormant or arrested stage, many of the mitochondria of the egg cells do lose their mitochondrial DNA to natural decay. And this decay process leaves compromised mitochondrial wall inside the cytoplasm of the egg cell. With many damaged mitochondria, the affected primary oocytes cannot grow into secondary oocytes during puberty.
Nature fixes this problem by making use of mitochondrial DNA that are acquired from immature sperm cells in the semen donated by a male sex partner or several male sex partners.
The semen contains both mature and immature sperm cells. A mature sperm cell has mitochondria with no mitochondrial DNA. But it is a mature sperm cell that fertilizes a mature egg cell. An immature sperm cell has mitochondria with mitochondrial DNA, and cannot fertilize a mature egg cell. That is why male infertility is linked to sperm cells with abundance of mitochondrial DNA. As immature sperm cells develop into maturity, they lose their mitochondrial DNA, and the mitochondria of a mature sperm is as good as dead. This is because a mitochondria without mitochondrial DNA cannot manufacture energy—it can only store it. Sperm becomes mature with an intact storage of energy located within its mitochondria. This energy was produced during the immature stage, when the sperm still possessed a mitochondrial DNA.
A mature sperm, the sperm that fertilizes the mature egg cell, does not pass its mitochondria to the egg. During fertilization, only the region of the sperm that contains the nuclear area joins up with the mature egg. The region that contains the mitochondria is left behind. Therefore, Mitochondria are passed only from mother to offspring. However, this is not the case for mitochondrial DNA from immature sperm. They reach the immature egg cells. And they are used by nature to repair damaged female mitochondria.
This fact is substantiated by the rare but confirmed cases of paternally inherited mitochondrial DNA in humans. In other words, even though mitochondria are one hundred percent maternally inherited, the mitochondrial DNA inside the mitochondria can originate from any of the sex partners of the mother from the age of puberty.
This brings with it two problems:
1.) RANDOM SELECTION
This mitochondria repair process does not occur one after the other amongst the affected primary oocytes. A viable primary oocyte usually contains approximately 6,000 copies of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and around 6,000 mitochondria. Mitochondrial DNAs from immature sperm do not fix up the mitochondria of one primary oocyte completely before it fixes another. There is no mechanism as such. Rather, the repair occurs in a zig-zag manner, as mitochondrial DNAs are distributed randomly among all the affected primary oocytes by chance. Therefore, for a given affected oocyte, it could take up to about 45-50 years (just before the age of menopause).
Until the repair is completed, a primary oocyte cannot graduate into a viable secondary oocyte. Therefore a primary oocyte can be in the repair process for about 45 to 50 years (the estimated age of menopause).
2.) RELATIVE CHARGES
A mitochondrial DNA consists of the phosphate group (the backbone structure, which always carry a negative charge) and nucleosides that are attached to the phosphate group. Generally, nucleosides are neutrally charged. Thus, the DNA is always negatively charged.
However, the charge of a mitochondrial DNA used for mitochondria repair in primary oocytes, depend on the pH levels of their place of origin, since the pH level of human bodies vary slightly from one person to another. This slight variation is highly magnified at the cellular level. Generally, mitochondria DNA remains negatively charged, despite the slight variation in pH from one individual to another. But mitochondrial DNAs that originate from different individuals possess varying charges relative to one another, ranging from relatively positive to relatively neutral to relatively negative.
For example, a pH of 7.35 is relatively acidic to a pH of 7.45; a pH of 7.45 is relatively basic to a pH of 7.40; and two pH levels of exactly 7.45 are relatively neutral to one another, even though all these pH levels are generally considered as basic. Mitochondrial DNA that originates from a relatively acidic pH will have a relatively positive charge to a mitochondrial that originates from a relatively basic pH, which will have a relatively negative charge. Mitochondrial DNA that originates from exactly the same pH level will be neutral to one another.
Every mitochondrial DNA from the same source, that is from the same male sex partner, has exactly the same charge. But a pool of mitochondrial DNAs from different sex partners will consist of mitochondrial DNAs of slightly varying relative charges, as already explained above.
Intracellular Electrostatic Interactions
(a) When damaged mitochondria are repaired with mitochondrial DNA acquired from the same source, that is, the same sex partner, electrostatic repulsions occur inside the cytoplasm of the egg cell, as the acquired mitochondrial DNAs repel themselves. Electrostatic repulsion takes place because all the acquired mitochondrial DNAs inside the cytoplasm contain the same relative charge.
Electrostatic repulsion maintains order in the cytoplasm. From our careful consideration, we conclude that an orderly cellular environment promotes constructive cellular behavior. Order is required for evolution to proceed constructively inside the cell—not disorder.
Thus under the condition above, evolution will proceed constructively inside the cells of an organism eventually produced from such an egg cell, after maturity and fertilization.
[Of course, chaos theorists may want to argue that the opposite is the case. It is quite reasonable to think that constructive essence arose out of chaos. But that happens when disruptions are either paused or disabled. Constructive essence can arose out of chaos when disruptions are paused, but the moment disruptions resume, all meaningful construction of nature breaks down. Sustainable construction cannot arose simultaneously with disruptions.]
(b) When the repair process is furnished with mitochondrial DNA acquired from different sources, that is, from different sex partners, electrostatic attractions may occur inside the cytoplasm of the egg cell, as acquired mitochondrial DNAs do attract themselves inside the cytoplasm of the egg cell when they have opposite relative charges.
This leads to disorder in the cell. As we have carefully observed, such disruptive environment hinders the constructive process of cellular innovation and evolution more often than not. The result is that evolution will most likely not proceed constructively inside the cells of an organism eventually produced from such an egg cell after its maturity and fertilization.
Electrostatic attractions produce what Barbara McClintock called “jumping genes”, mobile genetic materials within the cytoplasm. Today, we call them transposable elements or transposons.
Caveat: Although certain transposons seem to confer benefits on certain organisms, these benefits come at a urge prize: Transposons most often hinder the processes of cellular innovation and evolution by causing disorderliness. For example, transposon activity has been linked to various diseases, including cancer, neurological disorders like Alzheimer’s and schizophrenia, and autoimmune diseases. They may also become more active with age, contributing to cellular and tissue dysfunction.
Counter-Argument
Again, we want to emphasize that, although it can be argued with insights from chaos theory that evolution is propelled forward as a result of disorderliness generated by tranposons; and not the other way round. But a careful analysis of nature reveals that, although order usually arises out of disorder, order begins to take form when disorder pauses or ends. This is because sustainable order can not arise simultaneously in a closed system, in the midst of an ongoing disorderly event. The result would be eventual disruptions of any order attained.
In 1983, Barbara McClintock was awarded the Noble Prize in Physiology or Medicine for her discovery of tranposons, otherwise called “Jumping genes”. Building on the work of Barbara McClintock, we show that transposons can be understood as electrostatic attractions inside the cell, which, for all sexually reproducing organisms, began in the female mitochondria before, often very long before, the fertilization of the egg cell.
In summary, even though all Mitochondria in the offspring are maternally inherited, not all Mitochondrial DNA inside the Mitochondria are ORIGINALLY maternal. Mitochondrial DNA from semen of male sex partners are used to fix damaged primary oocytes (damaged as a result of degradation during the arrested stage of egg development) so that they can become viable secondary oocytes. When the mitochondrial DNA used for this purpose come from several male donors, it is most likely that a problem will arise. Attraction of opposite relative charges that emanate from the acquired Mitochondrial DNAs inside the mitochondria within the cell lead to genetic instability and disruptions in the egg cell, and this will continue to occur throughout the lifespan of the organism that is reproduced from that egg cell, after maturity and fertilization, and it is the cause of abnormal genetic conditions and genetically related diseases.
How Tranposons Pose A Global Catastrophic Risk To Human Survival In the Long Run
The LGBTQ+ conditions are genetically caused by transposons. The inability to reproduce on their own, the inability to reproduce naturally, the inability to reproduce without any artificial method, is a characteristic associated with the LGBTQ+ group. About 10 percent of the world population belong to the LGBTQ+ group today, and the population is on the rise. As the population of this group keeps going up, the rate of artificial births will skyrocket. And there would come a time when the LGTBQ+ group would become the majority.
Artificial births would surpass natural births. At the surface level, everything looks like a leap forward for human civilization.
But the price is heavy— artificial births will become unsustainable in most parts of the world for economic reasons. As the demand for artificial birth increases, the supply will increase. But the cost will not be affordable for everyone. The world still battles with hunger, for example. Adding artificial births to the burden will break the carmel’s back.
There comes the tipping point.
Human populations begin to decline worldwide.
Eventually, (it is just a matter of time) humanity would become extinct.
The most painful part of the story is that this path to extinction can be avoided.
Solution: The Accidental Rediscovery of the Scientific Basis of Certain Ancient Jewish Practices and the Origin of Judaism
There was a time in ancient Sumer when people practiced what could be described as Reproductive Fidelity. It is one of the three cultural practices that constitute the culture we could call “semitism”, traceable to the early Sumerians. It is a cultural practice that requires a female to keep to only one male for all sexual activities from the age of virginity, until she decided not to bear offspring any longer.
This practice was inherited by the Hebrew women, most particularly the women of the Levitical tribe, because this teaching was incorporated into the so called “Oral Torah” handed down to the Hebrews from Abraham who originated from Sumer. Particularly, it was emphasized in the Written Torah for the priesthood tribe, that is, the tribe of Levi. [ Read Leviticus chapter 21 verses 13,14 and 15; Hosea chapter 1 verses 2 to 6.] However, it was meant for all the tribes [Matthew chapter 19 verses 8 and 9].
Reproductive Fidelity, a term quite distinguishable from monogamy, is one of the instructions of the Torah. Like we stated before, we deduce that it was a cultural practice among the early Sumerians. However, it was rejected by the latter Sumerians because they considered it too much of a burden to bear, and they despised their predecessors for procreating in line with such a stringent rule.
So they revolted against it. This revolt was well documented—albeit, as an allegory—in Sumerian writings discovered in contemporary times. According to the legend, the latter Sumerians rebelled against “forced labor” which was being enforced by extraterrestrials, those “who from heaven came”.
What the latter Sumerians did not understand is that the extraterrestrials were trying to fast-track human biological evolution through certain cultural practices like the one mentioned above—reproductive fidelity.
In as much as we love and defend the LGBTQ + communities because we believe they have the right like everyone else to live happily and deserve no stigmatization, we believe it is crucial that we look into how these genetic traits are formed in the first place, and what we can do to ensure that such population in the future will be on the decline.
Until reproductive fidelity is taken seriously, the fate of humanity hangs in the balance.
Our Discovery: An Advance In Human Understanding of Evolutionary Biology
Before natural selection can take place, there must exist organisms within a population with a new beneficial trait. Such kind of traits accumulate with time; and, eventually, they would distinguish the group from others. Sometimes, as postulated by Charles Darwin, two groups of organisms within a population might evolve different kinds of beneficial traits (This is what Darwin called the Principle of Divergence), which would confer on the two groups different competitive advantages against a third group that did not evolve any beneficial trait.
There is always this third group that is left behind— this is the group of organisms that did not evolve any beneficial trait, yet they lived in the same environment as other groups and they all constituted the same species, once upon a time.
The beneficial traits would emerge as one or more new chain of genes; and as they accumulate, they furnish the organism with the capability to adapt and survive better than their peers. But why would certain organisms evolve a new beneficial trait; while during the same course of time, there are other organisms that could not evolve a new beneficial trait, not even a different kind of beneficial trait, which is in accordance with Darwinian Principle of Divergence. Yet all the organisms lived together as a population in the same environment and constitute the same species, before they became completely different from one another over evolutionary time.
After many generations, the group without any beneficial trait disappears. This is natural selection.
The big question is why did two groups developed beneficial traits, while the third group did not, even though they belong to the same species and lived together as same population over the same course of time?
The brilliance of Darwin’s work lies in the fact that it describes how beneficial traits accumulate with time to distinguish descendant organisms from their ancestors, branching out as a new species; not why the traits are able to develop in some descendants and not in other descendants, yet they all belong to the same species.
Moreover, this is a condition that must be met before adaptation and natural selection can take place— certain organisms within same population of a species must evolve certain beneficial traits. These traits would confer adapatability on those organisms that have evolved the traits, while they spell extinction for those organisms that did not evolve any beneficial traits.
After years of experimentation and research, we have finally obtained the answer to this very important question. In the evolutionary timeline, we can safely say that asexual reproduction came first. The earliest organisms reproduced asexually. This was the norm for billions of years until some organisms evolved sexual reproductive capabilities. Ever since this happened, there are certain basic principles that govern evolution— that is, the continual evolution of sexually reproducing organisms. One of these basic principles is reproductive fidelity.
We discuss the second principle in the next article.
Take Action:
Support this movement. Make a donation today. Click [here].
Share this article. Make it go viral.
