Of all the enticing mysteries posed by modern genetics, one of the most elusive and tantalizing has been the phenomenon of genetic differentiation.

In other words, what decides which of the genome's myriad genes to express in any given cell to create a muscle cell, for example, as opposed to a neuron or white blood cell? With a few exceptions, each cell in a person's or organism's body contains all the same DNA, and therefore the same genes.

What makes each cell in the body different is how that DNA is read-which genes are turned off or on and how frequently they are activated. For many years, elaborate biochemical feedback loops were proposed to explain this process, but in addition to the fact that most of these schemes have been insufficient to explain all of the data, none of these models identified the initial causative factor.

After studying the phenomenon for more than two decades, I believe that only an entity as sophisticated as consciousness could perform an activity as elaborate, responsive, and precise as genetic differentiation, but data that might suggest a mechanism for this possibility were not in evidence until recently. However, developments in electromagnetic research and electroencephalography point to possible means that could be employed by consciousness in interpreting and directing the expression of the genome.

Some of the ost important work in this field has been undertaken by orthopedic surgeon Robert Becker, who conducted a series of elegant experiments yielding a wealth of data concerning regeneration in amphibians and humans. (For a review of his work, see Becker, 1990; also Becker and Selden, 1985.) In plants and many animals, such as hydra, starfish, and salamanders, true regeneration of damaged or lost parts occurs routinely.

Cells previously differentiated into a particular type will dedifferentiate into embryonic-like cells (activating slumbering genes and switching off others) and then redifferentiate into the cells necessary to replace the injured or missing part. Salamanders can regenerate entire limbs, and chopped up starfish can often regenerate entire new bodies from pieces

of their arms. In humans, however, the only true regeneration that normally takes place is in the repair of bone fractures, where marrow cells dedifferentiate into neo-embryonic cells, then into a primitive type of cartilage cell, then into cartilage cells, and then into new bone cells (Becker and Selden, 1985, page 31).

Having detected a change in electric potential that preceded regeneration in salamanders, Becker and his co-workers discovered that in cases where human bone fractures were not healing on their own, application of a trillionth of an ampere of

negative current to the area would stimulate the regenerative process and the fracture

would heal (Becker and Selden, pages 141-175).

Clearly, the electromagnetic stimulus has an effect on the expression of the DNA of the cell. Less positive effects of electromagnetic fields on DNA are reflected in the

recent findings linking increased rates of cancer to overexposure to fields created by power lines (Brodeur, 1995).

That electromagnetic fields could have an affect on molecules such as DNA andits regulatory enzymes is no longer a surprise to anyone who is familiar with biochemistry. Atoms and molecules react and combine with one another based upon the charges of molecules and/or their parts. Water works as an effective solvent for hydrophilic molecules because the arrangement of oxygen and hydrogen produces a negative end to the molecule and a positive one.

The oxygen molecule "hugs" electrons to it by virtue of its larger nucleus so that the oxygen atom is negative, while the smaller hydrogen atoms "lose" their electrons to the oxygen and are more positive. The molecular structure of hydrophilic substances tends to be polarized electrically, so that they are attracted to water molecules. Enzymatic reactions are usually determined by the way in which amino acids fold and display their various negatively and positively charged (or neutral/hydrophobic) projections and pockets, which then fit as a charged lock and key to another protein or molecule.

The regulatory "transcription factors" that attach or detach from the regulatory portion of a gene (thus promoting or inhibiting the RNA polymerase to start reading the gene) are structured in the same polarized (or nonpolarized), folded arrangements as most enzymes; the Sp1 transcription factor discovered by Robert Tijan and William Dynan at UC Berkeley was found to have a region that folds up into three "zinc fingers," which act as hooks to attach activator proteins to the DNA, while the other end consists of

two segments dominated by the amino acid glutamine, which contains uncharged

polar subunits that can hydrogen-bond with water (Tijan, 1995).

Electromagnetic energy imparted to the electron orbitals of the regulatory transcription factors could certainly alter the way that the molecule folds, in just the same way that proteins respond to other forms of energy, such as heat, light, and sound. Molecules and atoms lose or gain electrons, or their electrons are boosted into different orbitals, when exposed to the appropriate quanta of energy; this process affects which molecular subunits are attracted to one another and how. The coagulation of a protein from heat is a common example of a different folding arrangement of a string of amino acids in response to energy input. It takes no great leap of logic to suppose that energy imparted to regulatory transcription factors could conceivably alter their shape and therefore, their reactivity.

Studies in electroencephalography have shown that the brain emits electrical signals of one-millionth of a volt or so. The "current of injury" produced by the nerves and bone matrix, which stimulates the differentiation of marrow cells to heal a bone fracture, falls within the millivolt range (peaking around 6 to 7 millivolts) (Becker and Selden, 1985, page 138). In addition, Becker and colleagues have discovered a second nervous system that operates in humans, one which involves a DC analog type of data transmission (as opposed to the digitally based system of our nervous systems) that involves the perineural cells and information contained in electromagnetic fields (Becker, 1990, pages 58-66). Information in this system is transmitted by means of a flow of semiconducting DC current. Experiments conducted by Becker (1990, page 64) showed unequivocally that this DC analog system was a causative agent in stimulating the healing of bone fractures in rats (where all nerve cells to the areas were severed).

Moreover, subsequent experiments by researchers showed that when a subject was requested to make a certain movement after being given a signal, an increase in negative DC current was detected after the signal, but almost a half-second before the muscular action was performed (Libet, 1991). Becker feels that the DC current is somehow involved in preparing the neurons to fire the command to move the muscles. Could this DC current, as well as our brainwaves and other bioelectric potentials, represent the manipulations of consciousness?

Of course, those who believe that consciousness is an epiphenomenon of neurological complexity can no doubt come up with a model in which this electromagnetic/molecular mechanism operates but is not regulated by consciousness. To me, trying to make sense of gene regulation without figuring in consciousness is the equivalent of assuming that a television set makes up and schedules its own programs; but I'm not prepared to prove that consciousness is the entity making the decisions in reading our genes.

Instead, for the purposes of discussion and exploration, I would prefer just to accept as a premise that humans are conscious beings and, as many consciousness researchers propose, that consciousness creates matter (and energy), rather than the other way around.

Using this as a starting point, it seems quite reasonable to suggest that consciousness could use electromagnetic fields in order to act upon matter.

Drs. D. L. Lantz and M. Barry Sterman, professors at UCLA's school of medicine, have used biofeedback to treat epilepsy, which is caused by either a physical lesion or a chemical abnormality in the brain (Lantz and> Sterman, 1988). Dr. Sterman reports in a recent interview that more than 60 percent of his patients have experienced 60 percent seizure reduction by learning how to reduce, mentally, the electrical excitability that triggers seizures along the brain's motor pathway (Bartholomew, 1994). Clearly, these subjects are voluntarily and deliberately altering their brain wave activity, producing a measurable physical/electrical effect. Recent experiments by Dr. Jonathan Wolpaw at the Wadsworth Center for Laboratories and Research have shown that subjects can even use their amplified brain waves to move a cursor around on a computer screen (Wolpaw and McFarland, 1994).

In addition, studies have shown that certain patterns of activities in different portions of the brain are correlated with certain personality types or emotional states. Experiments conducted by Andrew Tomarken, Richard Davidson and colleagues at the University of Wisconsin in Madison have shown that people with hyperactivation in the left frontal lobe may exhibit more optimistic personality traits, whereas less activity in the left frontal lobe compared to the right frontal lobe was found to be linked to negative thinking and depression (Davidson, 1992; Tomarken, et al, 1992).

Depression has been shown in several studies to lower immune function; Kang, et al (1991) have demonstrated that differences in brain wave activity can also affect such immune functions as the activity of natural killer cells and levels of M class immunoglobulins. Regulation of the genome through consciousness could well be the explanation for observations of physiological changes between personalities of those persons who suffer from multiple personality disorder, such as differences in allergies (Braun, 1983).

Significantly, EEG patterns for each personality of a multiple personality have been found to differ from one another (Putnam, 1982). And as is becoming increasingly clear, our thoughts and emotions actually stimulate the production of chemicals known as neuropeptides, for which there are receptors on the membranes of cells throughout our entire bodies. Our thoughts and emotions possess a tangible, even measurable electromagnetic component, and this electromagnetic component may well direct the interpretation of our DNA.

Our conscious minds could therefore have several different modes of biological/genetic action available to them: 1) They could affect gene regulation by directing the appropriate amount of energy to the appropriate regulatory transcription factors or related molecules (such as those residing in the cell membrane), affecting which genes are read and how often. 2) They could indirectly affect gene regulation by means of a cascade affect; regulatory enzymes produced by a direct electromagnetic action could then have further biochemical regulatory action on the genome. 3) The DC analog current could establish an electromagnetic blueprint or template which furnishes information to the regulatory transcription factors by means of their position within the field.

At present, most of this regulation is automatic and "unconscious," but it seems extremely likely that, given the proper understanding and training, we could learn to regulate our genes consciously to heal a wide variety of diseases from cancer to depression to genetic illnesses. In addition, we might be able to unmask certain traits that lie latent within our genetic structure, such as regeneration or psychic abilities. Evidence that such things are possible exists in the baffling case of the young man recounted in Larry Dossey's book MEANING & MEDICINE (1991, pages 151-152) who suffered from what he thought was a terrible case of warts. He went to see his physician, who tried everything he could. When nothing worked, he suggested that the young man try learning self-hypnosis, as this technique had proven effective for eradicating warts when nothing else would-a rather interesting phenomenon in its own right. Desperate, the young man did so, managed to clear up his skin, and happily returned to his physician to show him that his recommendation had proven successful. The physician was flabbergasted to say the least, as some lab results had come in since he last saw the young man.

It turned out that he did not have warts, but rather, he suffered from ichthyosis, Elephant man's disease, a congenital, genetic disease. He cured a genetic illness with hypnosis. Another puzzling case has recently surfaced where a boy born with ADA deficiency, a genetic disease that seriously impairs the immune system, managed to repair the defect in his chromosomes without medical intervention (Hirschhorn et al, 1996). At present, researchers can think of no mechanism to explain this spontaneous reversion.

Consciously regulating our genetic information is a challenge, of course. But I don't think that we need to obtain a genetic map of every single individual and then figure out how to beam the right amount of energy at every single regulatory transcription factor in order to make this system work for us. A great deal of therapies already exist that can help us to access this system, from visualization, to biofeedback, to hypnosis, to sound therapy, to chanting, to meditation, to magnetic and electromagnetic therapy, to prayer, to spiritual beliefs. I read recently in the Noetic Sciences Review that Garrett Yount, a researcher at the California Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco, is studying the effects of qi gong on the levels of specific messenger RNA's associated with targeted genes. Our thoughts, mental images, beliefs, intentions, prayers and feelings all have electromagnetic components to them, generated by our brains and the rest of our bodies to effect biochemical work. If we perfect techniques that train us to use our minds and feelings effectively, then perhaps we can learn how to regulate our genomes to their optimum expression.

Obviously, the advantages to such methods would be that they are the least invasive, with the fewest possible side-effects. Our bodies regulate our metabolic activities by producing extraordinarily minute amounts of molecules at just the right time in just the right tissue. Current pharmaceutical methods flood the body with chemicals in all kinds of tissues.

Side-effects occur, in part, because the same chemicals that perform one task in one

tissue will do something else in another. For example, cyclic AMP can stimulate the synthesis and release of steroid hormones by the adrenal glands and gonads, whereas in the liver, it is responsible for breaking glycogen (the energy storage molecule for animals) into the sugar glucose (Linder and Gilman, 1992). I believe that consciousness possesses the intelligence and omniscience necessary to make regulatory decisions that have the optimum, most balanced effect on all systems in the body.

In a world increasingly enamored with genetically engineered solutions to a wide variety of medical and social ills, an awareness of how our consciousness manipulates our genetic information is critical to our health and progress. Rather than embracing the overly simplistic concept of good genes vs. bad genes, we should be attempting to understand how our genomes work as a whole and in context, and how a different reading of an individual's genome might give us the results that we hope for. It is now well-known that one copy of the gene for sickle cell anemia confers resistance to malaria and evidence also suggests that one allele for Tay Sachs may confer resistance to tuberculosis (Pollack, 1994, page 51). Despite its impressive breakthroughs, genetic engineering is expensive, risky, and the long term outcome uncertain. The successes that have been obtained by these methods have been costly, and the potential abuses are disturbing.

Up until now, science has primarily turned its attention to one gene at a time; but perhaps it is as useful to envision our genome is as massive pool of available information. Depending upon both internal and external conditions, different portions of this pool, or database, can be called upon. Rather than conceptualizing the sum total of our genes as some sort of final script that cannot be deviated from, I think of it as an artist's paint box, or the palette in a computer paint program. All sorts of colors and shades exist to be used, but not all of them will necessarily be used for any particular painting. Some will be used more than others. But that doesn't mean that the artist couldn't create a different painting with the same paint box or palette. He or she could select different colors and paint a different but just as successful painting. Or colors could be selected that weren't so successful.

Say, for example, you possessed a particular gene that might predispose you towards breast cancer. A genetic predeterminist would tell you that you had an 85% chance of contracting breast cancer, depending, probably, upon what kinds of carcinogens you'd been exposed to during your lifetime. However, this gene is part of an entire complex of synergistically interacting genes and gene products. Under current ecological, psychological, and sociological conditions, this gene could, in fact, lead to an 85% rate of breast cancer. But genes don't exist or act independently. They act in concert with other genes and their products interact with other enzymes and proteins. In addition, genes often are not arranged linearly on a chromosome;transcribing enzymes often skip around in order to compose a complete gene.

Moreover, once the gene is transcribed, further editing of the mRNA strand takes place inside the nucleus. Gene sequences might be recombined in different combinations to form different gene products. In order for breast cancer to occur, an entire cascade sequence of metabolic events has to take place. You could, perhaps, trace the beginning of the cascade to the product of the cancer gene. But this gene could as easily remain silent and not express itself. Or it could be expressed in a different genetic and metabolic environment than a cancer-inducing one, where it would plug into an alternate biochemical pathway and have a completely different effect. It might produce an enzyme, for example, that helps build a necessary receptor molecule in the cell membrane.

Apparently, our bodies express only a fraction of the genetic material contained in our chromosomes. Some researchers figure that eighty to ninety-five percent of the genome is "silent," and no one knows whether the human body contains 100,000 or 400,000 genes per genome (Pollack, 1994, pages 92-93.). Rather than focus all our efforts on trying to alter and reengineer our genome's very structure, which we still do not understand in its synergistic entirety, why not try to find a way to reread or reinterpret the structure? The nitrogenous bases that make up the triplet codes for the genes have been likened to letters and the genes themselves to words; accordingly, consciousness fashions these words into meaningful forms, biological poetry that expresses our nature, being, and health. Learning to manifest our greatest, most constructive genetic potential could catapult man and womankind into an entirely new level of existence and well-being.

References

Bartholomew, A., 1994. "Biofeedback Is Back." Omni, vol. 17, page 16.

Becker, R., 1990. Cross Currents. Jeremy P. Tarcher, Los Angeles.

Becker, R. and Selden, G., 1985. The Body Electric. William Morrow and Company, Inc., New York.

Braun, B., 1983. "Psychophysiologic Phenomena in Multiple Personality and Hypnosis," American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, vol. 26, pages 124-137.

Brodeur, P., 1993. The Great Power-Line Cover-Up. Little, Brown and Company, Boston.

Davidson, R., 1992. "Anterior Brain Asymmetry and the Nature of Emotion." Br ain and Cognition, vol. 20, pages 125-151.

Hirschhorn, R., Yang, D. R., Jiang, C., Kurlandsky, L. E. "Spontaneous in viv o Reversion to Normal of an Inherited Mutation in a Patient with Adenosine Deaminase Deficiency." Nature Genetics, vol. 13, pages 290-295.

Kang, D., Davidson, R. J., Coe, C. L., Ershler, W. B., Wheeler, R. E., and Tomarken, A. J., 1996. "Frontal Brain Asymmetry and Immune Function." Behavi oral Neuroscience, vol. 105, pages 860-869.

Lantz, D. L. and Sterman, M. B., 1988. "Neuropsychological Assessment of Subjects with Uncontrolled Epilepsy: Effects of EEG feedback training." Epil epsia, vol. 29, pages 163-171.

Libet, B., 1991. "Conscious vs. Neural Time." Nature, vol. 352, page 27.

Linder, M. E. and Gilman, A. G., 1992. "G Proteins." Scientific American, vol. 267, pages 56-65.

Pollack, R., 1994. Signs of Life: The language and meanings of DNA. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.

Putnam, F., 1982. "Traces of Eve's Faces." Psychology Today, vol. 16, page 88.

Tijan, R., 1995. "Molecular Machines that Control Genes." Scientific American, vol. 272, pages 54-61.

Tomarken, A. J., Davidson, R. J., Wheeler, R. E., and Doss, R. C., 1992. "Individual Differences in Anterior Brain Asymmetry and Fundamental Dimensions of Emotion." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 62, pages 676-687.

Wolpaw, J. and McFarland, D., 1994. "Multichannel EEG-based Brain-computer Communication." Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, vol. 90, pages 444-449.