Hi again...

Explains everything

They aren't ''new'' enzymes, the mutation or imbalance causes too many enzymes to be created.

I ask, is it possible to have an over-abundance of a specific enzyme?

And what is the percent of enzymes relative to the water in the cell/mitochondria?

Post Merge: 10 years ago

I also ask if the mitochondria can suddenly burst and release these substrates (which can then be turned into highly reactive chemical)

Post Merge: 10 years ago

Because, if there's an imbalance in the cell itself, well the cell is constantly receiving substrates from the outside. Nothing can be built up per se, so any increase in an enzyme that's producing toxic chemicals will be slow so that the enzyme has time to be denatured by the toxic or unstable chemicals.

But if there's a build up of substrate in the mitochondria, and it bursts, and there's an over abundance of an enzyme which converts that substrate into reactive/unstable chemical, then there's trouble.

Post Merge: 10 years ago

BAD NEWS. I found out the mitochondria CAN burst, so it IS possible

You're trying real hard to prove that something exists. I'm wondering if there are any ulterior motives to this thread now. Were you the author of the Huffington Post article by any chance?

In order for any gene to be expressed in eukaroytic organisms, transcription factors are required. These factors (proteins) bind to genetic code upstream from the actual gene. Therefore, in order to over-express three 'existing' enzymes, you'd need three random mutations to simultaneously occur at different locations of a single cell. To make matters worse, not only would genes coding these transcription factors need to be mutated, the upstream non-coding regions of the enzymes would also need to be mutated lol And to make matters worse beyond that, enzyme genes are coded on all 46 chromosomes, and each chromosome set (1-23) has two different alleles to choose from! Let's say we're living in a dream world and this did occur; more enzymes doesn't necessarily mean more reactions. What good is it to have several enzymes, but not enough substrates to push the reaction forward? Is there now an amply supply of substrate coming from somewhere?



And, that is important because? Like I pointed out, if a mitochondrion bursts, there are 20 others that occupy the same cells. Lysosomes, tiny organelles in our cells, clean up that mess anyway. In addition, a mitochondrion is probably 1/1000 the size of the cell that contains it, so one 'bursting' is negligible.

You've got a good imagination, but this story is clearly bogus and I'm sure it won't fly in any scientific community.

But over-abundances do occur so I'm wondering if this could happen not locally but generally.

And I'm not trying to prove anything SHC just freaks me out and the more I read these news articles that I can't avoid the more convinced I am its real but I don't want that

Anyway the chemicals made from these substrates are reactive, so assuming that there was a very high conc. of substrate + equally high conc. of the enzyme that converts it into whatever reactive chemical... would these enzymes be destroyed before the concentration of this reactive metabolite could result in much heat production?

Not sure if reactive chemicals damage enzymes but it's worth an ask.

HI

After reading the article, my conclusion:

Snake oil. Frank Baker has made himself rich because of this I bet.


If these mutations do occur, by definition, those cells are cancerous. The cells would divide and produce enzymes uncontrollable everywhere within the vicinity.


Yes, they do.

So lets assume there's a high concenctration swarm of enzymes in the body making contact with a high concentration of substrate (which is getting converted to a highly reactive chemical)

Do the enzymes denature?


Do they denature immediately?

What would happen?

Depends on the chemical make up of the enzyme.


Denaturation occurs immediately, but all that is required, really, is for the active site to be affected by the chemical for it to stop work. Enzymes are pretty delicate.

So what would happen to them if this situation were to occur? Are all reactive chemicals damaging to these enzymes?

The enzymes would stop working contingent on the fact that the chemicals denature the enzymes. They would subsequently get digested inside the cell, and then the cell would be marked for destruction (apoptosis).

Give it up, this doesn't happen It's just a myth. The guy found a venue that no one else has exploited and is making money off it.

This ''chemical reaction'' theory is probably the only plausible mechanism of SHC I can think of..

SHC has hardly been solved. It is still a very controversial subject and here's why.

The Wick effect explanation doesn't cover the full extent of SHC, it only explains about half of the cases at most.

''SHC eyewitness cases in more detail'' offers several eyewitness cases of SHC, which cannot possibly be attributed to the wick effect.

There was a baby in India named Rahul who kept spontaneously combusting and it made national news at the time. The mother was an illiterate, there isn't any way she could have known about SHC. I honestly doubt a 3-month old was chain-smoking and drinking large amounts of alcohol.

Doctors subsequently diagnosed the 3-month old with Spontaneous combustion.
Doctors also diagnosed Frank Baker with spontaneous combustion (in that case, ''partial spontaneous combustion'').

These cases are instead seemingly consistent with an internal chemical reaction gone awry and I ask if that scenario is a mere possibility.


Acrylamide is an example of a chemical with selective reactivity. I don't think it reacts with proteins but its very reactive with some things and readily polymerizes. It's a byproduct of carbohydrates and starches.

Something to consider would be why Frank Baker says he has the doctors statement to back him up, offering all his contact details to people who don't believe him, if he's lying about the whole thing? Note that his friend Willey must also be a conspirator in this as well, because he says he was there with Frank when it happened. He requested for donations to (according to him) find a cure for SHC and to pay for the medical testing + hospital stays where his cells are being evaluated.

Whoa, watch the claims! Acrylamide is definitely not a byproduct of carbohydrates and starches.


Did Frank ever get a second opinion? Probably not.

Well I read statches when heated form acrylamide. Enzymes catalyse ''cooking' so I thought it'd be a byproduct in the body as well.

Cyanide doesn't denature nonmetallic enzymes, and according to the Human Metabolome Database, it's produced by the body's enzymes. Cyanide is highly reactive with ketones so I'm wondering if my scenario coupled with a diabetic could cause some nasty exothermic reactions to occur on a localized level.

Cyanide is toxic, yes, but I'm speaking on a small scale. We can assume that we have a cell that's producing a lot of substrate, and in the other cell next to the defective cells, we have a cell packed full of an enzyme which converts that substrate into cyanide. For some reason, these cells burst. So we'd get a burst of concentrated cyanide mixing with a high concentration of acetone which is a highly exothermic reaction through addition.

I know these scenarios are extremely implausible and unlikely, but unlikely things do and can occur so they must be considered before we are so quick to dismiss SHC.

I had trouble following it so I drew a diagram of the scenario to help http://oi59.tinypic.com/29zspe9.jpg

Post Merge: 10 years ago

I also should mention that hydrogen peroxide and acetone exist in the cells, when these mix together above 10 c it creates an explosive chemical which can actually detonate even if it's underwater spontaneously

Anyone?

Can someone reply to my theory please??