If an intelligent teenager (someone who has never experienced defects) by drug abuse or an accident damages his brain, will this person pass on his genes as they were for the damage or will the damage affect the born child?

If you are using genetic material to mean the base sequence of the DNA, the person will pass on his genes as they were for the damage (on some local DNA damage in the reproductive cells by carcinogens such as the combustion products of tobacco after, but that is Negligible).

However, science has long been aware that there is still an additional information layer about DNA: the epigenome.These are a kind of ‘ flags ‘ on your DNA that determine whether a gene should be active or not. These flags are actively adapted, to a large extent under the influence of environmental factors, so that your gene activation can be determined by your environment. These flags are partly passed on to cell division, allowing them to ensure that certain environmental factors do have a hereditary effect.

An example is hunger: it appears that families who have experienced the famine suffered from obesity for several generations (the Famine Ended 70 Years Ago, but Dutch Genes Still Bear Scars).

Another example is drug use which can cause health problems in the next generation.These flags can sometimes already be present by drug use from years before, although the effect seems strongest when used during pregnancy (Epigenetic effects of smoking-Wikipedia).

Genes do not really change, but the way the genes work changes.So you can have exactly the same genes, e.g. One single twin, but if the genes are in another situation, e.g. The wombs of different mothers, the genes will behave differently.

This is because genes are not one-way traffic, as one thought before, but genes are triggered by hormones.An example is the field mouse. Some populations are monogamous, others are polygamous. The functioning of the gene determines whether a population is monogamous or polygamous, but the function of the gene is determined by the presence of hormones such as vasopressin or oxytocin. So you could grab some field mice from the monogamous population, administer vasopressin, and get a polygamous population. The idea is that a population monogamous or polygamous is because the active hormones are given away from the uterus, so here is a form of non-genetic inheritance.

We See the same thing in people.Shortly through the bend, if you were an embryo during the hunger winter of ‘ 44/’ 45, then you are much more susceptible to glucoseintolerance. And even stranger, the children of the women who have this get a slower metabolism again, after which his children get a faster metabolism, etc., until the effect disappears again after a few generations. The genes are no different to that of the average human, but the way the genes work though.

This is called Lamarckian inheritance, i.e., the non-genetic aspects of inheritance.The academic field in which this is studied is called epigenetics. So imagine you have a mother who has suffered damage from drug use. If there is a endocrine-disrupting hormone, it is not inconceivable that the child will be affected by the previous use of drugs. The damage does not have to take place at the genetic level in order to have an effect on the following generations.

I am not an expert, and everything I write here is theoretical and hypothetical.There may also be a mistake or two in the details, but broadly this story is right. Stress hormones are known to affect unborn children[1 , so that’s an indication that hormone management is relevant. It is not unthinkable that when one has used such a lot of drugs that there is brain damage, the hormone management is also disrupted. Impaired hormone management may not result from brain damage.
But actually, you need research into specific forms of substance abuse to discover what the possible consequences are when one gets children after ever having had a addiction.The Lamarckian effect, if it is already present, will vary by means, per damage and per person. I am writing this answer mainly to indicate that inheritance is complicated, even if one is confined exclusively to biological processes. So I did not agree on the social consequences of brain damage by means of abuse, and what effect this could have on upbringing. Don’t get me wrong, ex-addicts can be great parents, and I’m not writing this piece to judge about (ex-) addicts. I am writing this mainly to indicate that inheritance, and man in general, is incredibly complex. I hope you have read it with pleasure.

Footnotes

[1 transgenerational Stress Inheritance-Wikipedia

As for the damage… Your genes do not change through what you are doing the rest of your life.

There you can make an exception at local level in case of specific illnesses such as cancer where the genetic information of some cells is damaged.

The use of drugs or the accident does not affect the genetic material from which the small is built.When the drug use or the accident occurred during pregnancy, it could have influenced the development of the small.

Leave a Reply