The problem with most theories of this type, and the author does admit that it is just a hypothesis , is that it tries to extrapolate the macro from the micro. He looks at one gene in isolation and then expands what he believes the function of that gene to be to encompass the basis for how the whole organism works.
The problem with this is that nothing in our bodies is isolated and every gene, system, and hormone interact in multiple complex ways with every other gene, system, and hormone. What happens is that we try to manipulate a single gene or function and are suddenly faced with unintended and unforeseen consequences – most of which are bad.
Our bodies act like a complex crowd of people. We have no idea what any given person (the micro) will do confronted with a specific stimulus, but we can accurately predict the general reaction of the whole (the macro). So it is with our bodies. We have great trouble accurately predicting the long term effects of manipulating a specific gene or hormone, however, the long term effects, the symptoms of which can vary markedly between individuals, can be seen on the whole organism or across a general population.
I suppose we have to start somewhere, but it is clear that the current process of looking for a single gene, hormone, or chemical that can be manipulated to solve a given problem has not been overly effective. As a grand example, we may successfully reduce cholesterol to what modern science thinks is a ‘safe’ level, but the patient ends up with many complications significantly affecting quality of life, and lifespan is not increased beyond what would normally be expected and may actually be shortened.
We study whole populations to observe a problem or trend and then try to fix it with a single targeted solution. If life functions were this simplistic all life would have been wiped eons ago by the first environmental stressor and never evolved to its current state, but such is the state of current research.
Lex
