User:Wakecountystudent11/sandbox

The flow of genetic information from DNA to RNA to protein has been characterized as the central dogma of life, meaning that it is a principal that is virtually undisputed and well known. While this has gone undisputed by professionals, I have a different look at what the central dogma of life really is. The question into this field of study really came out when I asked myself, "can something so simple be so important"? Supposedly, from what we are taught, this process is extremely crucial to human development—to life in general. However, when looking further into the issue, how can something so important be so vulnerable? I explored my own thesis for this topic, "the transfer of genetic information through DNA, RNA, and protein is not the central dogma of life because of the fact that the process is vulnerable and can be replicated by humans".

First things first, we need to truly understand why the flow of genetic information is considered, to professionals, the most important process in life. Genetic information is something that is stored in DNA which essentially programs our body's functions. It is important that this information gets transferred so that new DNA molecules can be made, so processes like cell reproduction can occur. DNA is something that is in every single cell that is naturally in our body. So of course we could say that this process is one of the most important processes in the fact that it is something that inhibits the output of many functions our body takes on. However, with that being said, genetic expression, which is a product of DNA instructions being converted into something functional, can be affected by environmental factors such as drugs, chemicals, or temperature proving its vulnerability.

The vulnerability of genetic information transfer goes beyond environmental factors. The vulnerability of the argument that favors the idea of central dogma being the transfer of genetic information through DNA to RNA to protein is also extremely prevalent. Glencoe Science textbook on biology stated also that the central dogma of life was expressing genes from DNA to RNA to protein. However, I dispute that on the basis of a very well known science of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). How are we able to call something that is so precious to life important when life itself can modify the traits which are transferred? Indeed, we can say that copying the DNA and replicating it for transfer is in its own category. But, if you think about it, you'd realize it indeed isn't. Humans have the ability to genetically modify organisms which could be replicated time and time again, and the process in which the transfer of these genes occurs won't regulate the genetic information that is carried on, a common issue that is causing an issue for cancer researchers. Which once again goes back to my point of vulnerability in the process. Not only that, but it poses another question of whether something that is beneficial to life, if replicated by humans, is really that important?

Last but not least, if the flow of genetic information isn't the central dogma of life, then what is? Well, I've concluded that something the flow of energy is actually far more important to life forms than the flow of genetic energy would be. The four characteristics of life are the abilities to respond to the environment, grow and develop, reproduce, and must be able to maintain homeostasis. All of which require energy consumption and use. In addition, energy is being used around us all the time, even if we don't know it. The process of gene transfer through DNA to RNA to protein requires energy, which would go to prove my point that energy is the real central dogma of life. If that wasn't enough convincing, think of this; when someone's heart stops, medical personnel use a defibrillator to restart the heart. What is a defibrillator, you may ask? It is simply a device that delivers a pulse (an electric shock) to the heart to restart it. Going to show that not only is energy transfer the central dogma of life, but that it can also save lives.

Gene transfer has been characterized as the central dogma of life by many professionals. While it is among one of the main ones, it simply is not the main one. I strongly believe that the central dogma of life is the transfer of energy, not only because the argument for why gene transfer is the central dogma is weak and can be replicated by humans, questioning whether or not something so important can be replicated artificially, but because the transfer of energy is a system that can easily beat out gene transfer in a battle over which is the real central dogma. I explored my own thesis for this topic, "the transfer of genetic information through DNA, RNA, and protein is not the central dogma of life because of the fact that the process is vulnerable and can be replicated by humans", and I hope that you can agree with me on the three points that I made in favor of the idea that gene transfer is not the central dogma.