Surely prion diseases are an example of protein to protein, which the article specifically says was part of the CD?
I’m not unhappy with the tone of the article suggesting that Watson, yet again, vastly misunderstood the work of his betters while taking credit for it.
The “dogma” is “information flow from proteins back to genetic material does not occur” not that proteins can’t transfer information. Regardless of considering “shape” as information or not, the transfer is not violating that statement, the information is fully trapped in the protein and not flowed back to DNA.
the article argues that prions do not facilitate the flow of information in the same way the Dogma states. They simply change the way the protein is folded, but not the amino acids in the structure. I disagree with this (I have papers in this field that say the opposite), but that is the argument.
> Information here means the sequence of the amino acid residues, or other sequences related to it.
Prions do not transfer sequence information between proteins, so this is in keeping with Crick's idea.
I've always assumed that Watson understood Crick's idea perfectly well, but used the simpler formulation because it was easier to communicate, while still being mostly accurate.
Yes, that is highly likely. Most causality flows in the same direct—from DNA variants through RNA variants, through protein variance to differences in phenotypes.
Many many exceptions, but this is the main causal flow.
(to clarify: Ribosomes are composed of mostly protein; they are protein/RNA complexes in which the enzymatic functionality is implemented by RNA enzymes that are decorated with proteins that stabilize the complex, as well as increase its efficiency).
It seems the articles purpose is less about what could best be described as dunking on what 10th graders are taught about molecular biology for simplicity’s sake, and more about discrediting Watson by reframing the past, and chipping away at his legacy because of… well, you know.
Hanging your name on things has always been a double-edged sword in any context, but science is actively held back by cults of personality. Your contributions might be foundational, but your legacy is harmful.
>...Specifically, prion proteins do not change the sequence of amino acids; they instead transmit their pathological shape to otherwise “healthy” proteins, causing them to misfold in the same way. Prion diseases do not alter the validity of the Central Dogma because they don’t alter any genetic sequences.
I’m not unhappy with the tone of the article suggesting that Watson, yet again, vastly misunderstood the work of his betters while taking credit for it.