Elaine Meinel Supkis
The genetic riddle of what causes autism is slowly being solved as human geromes are mapped and connected with traits. Autism affects boys much more than girls so it is also connected with the sex genes. Why does this condition exist? Is it unnatural or is our own evolution unnatural?
The world's largest search for genes linked to autism has uncovered new mutations believed to raise a child's risk of developing the brain disorder.*snip*
The search found two new mutations - one in an unknown gene on chromosome 11, and the second a defect in a protein called neurexin 1, which works with a brain messenger chemical called glutamate to enable neighbouring neurons to communicate with one another.
Autism isn't a clear either/or situation. For example, some genetic traits like hemophilia are inherited and are due to a mutation on the Y chromosome. It is also totally fatal from an evolutionary point of view. The opposite blood-related mutation from Africa, sickle-cell syndrome, evolved in nature and affects both males and females because people with this blood quality survived better than those without because mosquitoes couldn't suck their blood very well and so, avoided them, sparing them from insect borne diseases.
At first, researchers thought autism was a sex-gene condition but this proved to be partially wrong.
The researchers did not find that autism was becoming more common but believe it is now diagnosed more often. It affects nearly four times as many boys as girls.
Today's news widens the search and illuminates more of this dark landscape. One thing that always has bothered me was the confusion of calling genetic traits 'diseases.' I wish other words were used. Sickle cell traits are not a 'disease' at all but rather, a survival coping method created by evolutionary forces. If all such coping conditions were labeled the same way, everything from sponges on upwards are 'diseases' rather than healthy, living organisms.
Cancers, germ-borne sicknesses, strokes, heart attacks, etc. should be called 'diseases' while inherited traits that are caused only by genetic inherited traits should be called 'genetic malfunctions' or something else appropriate. We seldom see these malfunctions in nature simply because they are eliminated very rapidly from the gene pool by death. But the engine of evolution depends on genetic malfunctions and these happen nonstop because of the sun, age and random chance.
In the early history of the earth, the environmental stresses of this young planet/star system constantly re-arranged the genetic chains built up by the single celled organisms that teemed around the hot water vents. When one small population had their molecular order accidentally jiggered so they could use the energy from the sun rather than from the ocean vents, their population exploded and took over the entire planet. Sex was due to a broken chromosome and this accident caused evolutionary change to leap forwards gigantically and variations in the increasingly complex strings of DNA and RNA created the amazing, interlocking variety of life forms we see today.
Today's genetic 'disease' may be tomorrow's evolutionary solution. One obvious example is dwarfism or midgets: in many environments, these genetic traits would obviously be very beneficial! So the genes appear in the general population but as a small minority, a situation that could change instantly if the environment changes!
Autism and other genetic flaws that express themselves as an inability to function smoothly in the prevailing social matrix are due to slight flaws in our genetic code. The genes for various social tricks, evasions, cleverness, cannibalistic impulses (heh, we all descended from cannibals!), sexual scheming, and of course, the ability to nurture and raise very difficult animals called 'babies' are quite a few, the obvious place where small mutations can cause big social problems is in the genes that distinguish our behavior from that of our cousins, the Great Apes.
Humans, like many ape species, are very social. But even that isn't total! We know from research that Orangutans are social only with their mothers and then that disappears when still quite young and the rest of the time, they are totally anti-social, sex has even evolved into near-rapine. Mothers don't keep in contact with any children nor does any form of what we call 'love' exist for them. Yet it solved their environmental difficulties and allows one of the biggest apes to live on the slender resources of dense jungles.
Gorillas are in a similar environment but evolved a rudimentary clan life that depends on reading each other's faces, noises and gestures. In nature, any individual in these wild settings that fails to read the clan's information flow usually end up dead. The simple lives other great apes live is due to the fact, they seldom interact with other clans and if they do, they usually try to drive each other off.
Humans had two evolutionary solutions to living in dangerous climates and environments: they banded together as clans and they reached out to other clans for sexual mates due to clan rules they invented--an invention more powerful than the wheel or nuclear bombs--rules for mating that involved exogamy: seeking mates from outside the immediate extended family.
Instead of using herd chaos to avoid inbreeding or using the lion solution whereby all males are kicked out and must find new families by fighting older lion males and ejecting them from the pride, humans used a clever system run entirely by the human mind teaching each other how to court, who to have sex with and the tool picked by humans was 'taboos' which simply forbade sex with a varying list of women and men of varying ages or conditions.
Because of this deliberate intermixing rules of engagement, many of the genes for social interactions are triangulated between the sex chromosomes and mostly one specific chromosome: #11.
Chromosome 11 is one of the 23 pairs of chromosomes in humans. People normally have two copies of this chromosome. Chromosome 11 spans about 134.5 million base pairs (the building material of DNA) and represents between 4 and 4.5 percent of the total DNA in cells. It is one of the most gene- and disease-rich chromosomes in the human genome.Identifying genes on each chromosome is an active area of genetic research. Because researchers use different approaches to predict the number of genes on each chromosome, the estimated number of genes varies. Chromosome 11 likely contains between 1,300 and 1,700 genes.
A recent study [1] shows that 11.6 genes per megabase, including 1,524 protein-coding genes and 765 pseudogenes can be found on chromosome 11.
More than 40% of the 856 olfactory receptor genes in the human genome are located in 28 single- and multi-gene clusters along this chromosome.
I find it extremely interesting that nearly half of our smelling ability genes are on this particular strand of DNA! And many of the genes involved in 'genetic diseases' are on this strand and in particular, the disorders that express themselves as social inabilities are on the same DNA location as our ability to process and remember smells. Throughout the animal universe, one thing stands out like a blazing sun: we use our sense of smell to have sex.
Yes, it is a smelly business indeed. The human brain is hardwired to respond to sexual smell cues. Smell also enables mothers to fall in love with infants, for infants to know the difference between women who are not mother versus mother. For men to locate women who are 'available' versus women who are menstruating. Modern societies hate these smell cues and goes to greatest lengths to hide this vital information from each other because we are no longer in widely-separated tribal groups avoiding contact with each other except in war or marriage exchanges.
To keep the peace, we collectively hide our smells which betray our ever-changing human condition. This makes it very difficult for humans who need more social clues to survive! They have lost this necessary tool for interpreting human relations, leaving them in the dark in important ways.
Just a few days ago, the role of the DNA concerning the ability to interpet smells was in the news. The brain cells connected with smell, memory and sex regenerate better than all other brain cells. And to do this, they form in the Insula, travel to the nose to pay a visit and then return to the brain in an attempt to fix what Mother Nature thinks are the most vital links! So cutting off the connection of smell to the sexual parts of the brain causes social distress we can't understand.
For example, I loved smelling my babies. Also, babysitting since youth, I found that I had to overcome an aversion to the smell of other women's babies. In other words, they stank. If one perfumed them with powders and such, they became bearable. But when I had my own babies, the smell of even their dropping excited an important part of my brain. I was filled with wonder about this. For the stench of diapers are supposed to be a disgusting thing!
Instead, to me, it was perfectly fine! Watching mother dogs, cats or whatever eat their babies' dropping and urinations, I wondered as a child, how they could do that and why it gave not just the babies being licked so vigorously, pleasure, but the mother seemed to enjoy this, too! Indeed, some mother cats or dogs will happily lick their spawn's bellies even if the kitten or puppy begins to protest!
The domesticated dogs and cats that live with us, if they are properly raised, will adopt the smell of a new baby if introduced to it in a natural way, as part of a growing pack, will defend the baby from all strangers which is why dogs were domesticated very early on. Cats, that drive away all family members when grown, don't have a trigger for defending creatures after puberty.
Neurexin mediates the assembly of presynaptic terminals
Camin Dean,1,3 Francisco G Scholl,2,3 Jenny Choih,1 Shannon DeMaria,1 James Berger,1 Ehud Isacoff,1 and Peter Scheiffele*2This result supports the idea that the synaptogenic activity of neurexin critically depends on protein interactions with the cytoplasmic domain of neurexin, suggesting that extracellular clustering of neurexin leads to intracellular recruitment of scaffolding or signaling proteins in the axonal cytoplasm.
In our analysis of the molecular mechanism of neuroligin-induced synapse formation, we observed that overexpression of neuroligin stimulates pre- and postsynaptic differentiation in cultured hippocampal neurons, suggesting that neuroligin is a limiting component of the postsynaptic machinery involved in synapse formation. Neuroligin activity depends on its interaction with neurexins. We found that (i) endogenous neurexins are concentrated in synaptic terminals, (ii) postsynaptic multimers of neuroligin-1 are sufficient to trigger the recruitment of neurexin to newly forming synaptic sites and (iii) clustering of neurexin induces recruitment of synaptic vesicles.
The neurexin family of proteins was first identified as high-affinity receptors for the venom alpha-latrotoxin13. Although an involvement of neurexins in the latrotoxin response of neuronal cells is now well documented14,15 the subcellular localization and normal function of the neurexins are still unknown16-18.
Neurexins are the physical means of making the computing systems of our brains to route energy impulses from one spot to another. Like routers on the internet or various components in our computers, they mediate the structure for transmissions. If they don't build their 'scaffolding', connections fail and important data isn't passed on to parts of the brain where they can be exchanged to other sectors which then pass things to the appropriate terminals like the facial muscles or fingers.
The scientists studying these important neural agents still don't understand fully how they work, how they are inherited, how many genetic triggers activate or deactivate them, gradually these riddles are being solved. But the interesting thing about autism and its associated variations is how this human condition is really a rainbow of effects that run from one extreme to the other end.
Namely, there really is no such thing as 'autism' versus 'sanity'. I contend, we humans have evolved into insanity. Namely, coupling our vast brain's hardware with our own tampering with our own evolution via mental games designed to guide our breeding based on clan imperatives and rules, we have evolved some pretty odd, strange and often destructive genetic materials connected with sex.
Humans are seldom sane. If one looks at our species as a zoo keeper, it is quite obvious that the most troublesome creatures to care for would be humans. Even if I were an alien and figured out how to 'domesticate' humans, the genetic disposition to lie, conceal and mislead is so deeply embedded in our genetic code, we would be nearly impossible to cage except in the way we cage each other: brutally eliminating nearly all contact or interactions, locked securely away.
I know from my own family, hatred grows like weeds within close family members as well as strangers. This inability to cooperate as families, even, characterizes human populations. The need to live and cooperate forces us together but the cannibal genes (to be blunt) drives even fathers and mothers to kill their own young. The prohibitions set up as cultural artifacts by our societies are set there precisely because without their slender prohibitions, we would cheerfully kill off each other, totally.
A prime example is, my own parents disowned me because I wrote things about humans tending to be cannibals. 'People aren't that horrible!' my father said as he hung up on me in an uncontrolled rage, never to communicate again! This irrational behavior is typical of humans. If one regards our species with a cold eye, it is amazing we can exist, much less, flourish.
But the wonder of the human mind is, we can and do! Thanks to culture. And the one thing autistic children can't gain well is culture. The stronger the genetic mutation for this condition is, the less the carrier can interact even on a basic social level. It affects all aspects: interpeting facial expressions, responding to appropriate smells, talking and making tools. Everything that defines humanity.
Neurexins are polymorphic cell surface proteins that are expressed in neurons. They were discovered by Ushkaryov et al. (1992) in the course of cloning the presynaptic receptor for alpha-latrotoxin. Three neurexin genes, designated 1 (NRXN1), 2 (NRXN2; 600566), and 3 (NRXN3; 600567), were identified in a rat brain cDNA library by Ushkaryov et al. (1992). Ichtchenko et al. (1995) observed that each neurexin gene has 2 independent promoters which generate 2 classes of mRNAs: the longer mRNAs encode alpha-neurexins and the shorter mRNAs encode beta-neurexins. Thus, 6 principal neurexin isoforms, called neurexins I-alpha to III-beta, result, of which neurexin I-alpha corresponds to the high molecular weight component of the alpha-latrotoxin receptor. Ushkaryov et al. (1992) showed that rat neurexins are expressed at significant levels only in brain. Ullrich et al. (1995) found that the 6 rat neurexin isoforms are coexpressed in neurons and are distributed differentially in various brain regions. Neurexins display a remarkable evolutionarily conserved pattern of extensive alternative splicing. As a result, the total number of neurexins in brain probably exceeds 2,000 (Ullrich et al., 1995). Neurexins contain epidermal growth factor-like sequences and domains homologous to the G domain repeats of laminin A (LAMA; 150320), indicating a function in cell-cell interactions.
This is so exciting! The neurexins at the base of many of the effects of autism and other social/sexual manifestations in human behavior have this amazing ability to change themselves! They are where Mother Nature plays out her gene splicing experiments that impact on our brain's ability to process sexual and social information.
Here we show the isolation of 230 new recessive mouse mutations, 88 of which are on chromosome 11. This genetic strategy efficiently generates and maps mutations on a single chromosome, even as mutations throughout the genome are discovered. The mutations reveal new defects in haematopoiesis, craniofacial and cardiovascular development, and fertility.
And we have a lot of these in our brains! More than most any other creature. Maybe elephants and whales come close to our own family of great apes in this way.
So it is no wonder that these neurexins have their genetic homebase in the 11th Chromosome. This is where we park most of our sex-related genetic material that isn't on the actual sex genes themselves, the X and Y chromosomes. This is why so many genetic 'diseases' are located on this same chromosome, perhaps. Namely, the need for social interactions leading to sex and social interactions leading to not being eaten for dinner has evolved in this fashion: survivors of this rat race that was started when the environment began to slide into the harsh and unstable Ice Ages has caused our species to evolve a very complex social/genetic complex that is concentrated on sex and birthing.
Which is also why many of these genetic flaws are concentrated in the male population. Genetic defects that prevent good mothering don't go far due to the fact, babies will die if the mother is even slightly inept. But males, if they can survive to adulthood, can find room to mate somehow. Not enough to overwhelm the entire population but enough to keep the genes for autism floating in the main population.
For this isn't a singular mutation like that which causes cancer, for example. It involves more than one gene. So this leads me to believe, it is kept in our population by breeding. Inbred communities like the Jewish community, is full of genetic flaws that cause terminal conditions. Any inbred community of animals has this problem. The greater the genetic pool, the less often genetic fatal flaws get expressed. But autism isn't confined to any singular genetic pool, all human types can have this condition which leads me to believe it is at the very beginning of our evolution as walking apes.
And is part of being a Great Ape, perhaps.
In humans, the Y chromosome spans 58 million base pairs (the building blocks of DNA) and represents approximately 0.38% of the total DNA in a human cell. The human Y chromosome contains 78 genes, which code for only 23 distinct proteins. This relationship is typical in that most species' Y chromosomes contain the fewest genes of any of the chromosomes.Because the Y chromosome changes relatively slowly over time and is only passed along the direct male line, it may be used to trace paternal lineage. It is the cause of the fewest number of known genetic diseases in humans (44 in total).
The Y chromosome doesn't cause these problems, it is the absence of genetic material that exposes males to many of these genetic problems connected with the 11th chromosome, it would seem. And again, this is due entirely to evolution: males only have to mate to pass on genes. Females have to produce young and then make certain they survive if they want to pass on their genes.
A kid named Nick chimed in. “The reason your brother might be doing that is because autistic kids, they have almost better senses. I know it sounds weird, but, like, my brother, he can hear things that are really low. It’s nothing really bad; it’s just something that happens.”
I know from my own family, the ability to hear things 'normal' people can't hear, is very high. I can hear bats chittering. I used to hunt down noisy insects in the house at night when a child, they drove me to distraction. Members of the family displaying more autistic impulses got mad at the sound of airconditioners or vacuum cleaners. Most of this fades as adulthood arrives but in childhood, could be very difficult. I was accused of walking too loudly when going through the house. I spent most of my childhood outside, away from home because of this.
Geniuses often suffer from Asberger's syndrome, a form of autism. The genes which enable high intelligence are somehow interacting with the same neurexins that are triggering thought processes in the brain, enabling 'intellligence' that is often coupled with social cluelessness. And this is very evolutionary: many rulers hate smart people with a passion and egg on their populations into persecuting or murdering intellectuals. This is probably why our brains have nearly totally stopped evolving. Even today, we see this at work in our media, mocking the smart and petting the 'average' person, flattering them and claiming they are 'real', not like those stupid egg-heads (calling on Al Gore, please take center stage!).
The siblings in the NYT article are quoted arguing all time about making noise and smells. Yes, the autistic boys love smells and they love their own smells and one of the signs of this sort of mental impar
Here is one of the official ASD sites that describe this condition:
All children with ASD demonstrate deficits in 1) social interaction, 2) verbal and nonverbal communication, and 3) repetitive behaviors or interests. In addition, they will often have unusual responses to sensory experiences, such as certain sounds or the way objects look. Each of these symptoms runs the gamut from mild to severe. They will present in each individual child differently. For instance, a child may have little trouble learning to read but exhibit extremely poor social interaction. Each child will display communication, social, and behavioral patterns that are individual but fit into the overall diagnosis of ASD.Children with ASD do not follow the typical patterns of child development. In some children, hints of future problems may be apparent from birth. In most cases, the problems in communication and social skills become more noticeable as the child lags further behind other children the same age. Some other children start off well enough. Oftentimes between 12 and 36 months old, the differences in the way they react to people and other unusual behaviors become apparent. Some parents report the change as being sudden, and that their children start to reject people, act strangely, and lose language and social skills they had previously acquired. In other cases, there is a plateau, or leveling, of progress so that the difference between the child with autism and other children the same age becomes more noticeable.
Geniuses often suffer from Asberger's syndrome, a form of autism. The genes which enable high intelligence are somehow interacting with the same neurexins that are triggering thought processes in the brain, enabling 'intellligence' that is often coupled with social cluelessness. And this is very evolutionary: many rulers hate smart people with a passion and egg on their populations into persecuting or murdering intellectuals. This is probably why our brains have nearly totally stopped evolving. Even today, we see this at work in our media, mocking the smart and petting the 'average' person, flattering them and claiming they are 'real', not like those stupid egg-heads (calling on Al Gore, please take center stage!).
The siblings in the NYT article are quoted arguing all time about making noise and smells. Yes, the autistic boys love smells and they love their own smells and one of the signs of this sort of mental impairment is when a child likes to sniff themselves. Of course, this is actually a deep animal urge, observe dogs: they identify everything with their noses and they love to smell themselves and they also roll in horse manure in order to hide their smells from their intended prey. Even if they are not hunting horses, their genes tell them to do this.
Autistic children probably rely on smells more than 'normal' people because this is still functional in them. And this makes them even more out of step with other humans who hide their own odors and who use words and facial expressions to project a false front. Some brain damage caused by genes have made some people unable to socialize but make them excellent lie detectors for some can hear variations in the tone of voice to detect lies but can't function normally in other ways.
Normal humans are easy to deceive. Even ancient people made fun of this, the very old 'Adam and Eve' story coming to mind, for example. Even knowing God could see the truth no matter what, they still tried not once but several times, to lie to him after eating the apple of knowledge.
They then went off to have sex and kids. And their one kid killed the other. A great start, no? But revealing: even thousands of years ago, humans recognized the slender threads that bind us, the dangers of our own mind's ability to try to trick each other or kill each other, the mix of sex, family and death causing us to evolve some very elaborate mental structures using our own DNA and our ability to learn, to make a very complex, very strange ecosystem and society.
Red in tooth and claw.
Culture of Life News Main Page
I have a lot of material on these subjects, Elaine. I scan the biochemistry journals and various psychological journals. Every 20 years some paradigm gives way to another, a phenomenon that does not inspire confidence. I will try to share some of my seeings with you when I get the time. Genetic theories are now the rage, but that may not, at the present level, last over time. The DNA makes the proteins, but then the proteins start to control the genes that made them. And the human neurosystems that were created by the proteins will soon in turn be driving them. And something else is emerging as well, something no one suspects. There is so much more.
Gotta run for now.
Posted by: blues | February 19, 2007 at 11:50 AM
"The human brain is hardwired to respond to sexual smell cues."
But the search for that elusive male pheromone that drives women ape-wild still goes on. If there is such a thing and it's ever discovered, it will save the male humans of the world a great deal of money (and will make its discoverer rich beyond the dreams of avarice.)
Until then, it's gonna have to be flowers, chocolate, dinners, movies...
Posted by: JSmith | February 19, 2007 at 02:02 PM
Um, the reason the Neanderthals were eaten (er) disappeared was because of those caves. Any male wanting to have sex had to first find a place where no cave bears, mastadons or sabertoothed tigers were lurking.
So it is today: you have to first set up a house if you want something. But then, there are always 'loose' females about if one can't be bothered with the next generation. But having useless sex is ....unevolutionary.
Only the mothers who had babies, reared them and made them successful, pass on genes.
Posted by: Elaine Meinel Supkis | February 19, 2007 at 09:51 PM
Hi blues,
I don't think the be-all-end-all pheromone will be discovered for humans because we pick mates based on differing MHC-1 (Major Histocompatibility Complex class I) not a simple molecule (heh, I hope not anyway!)
But some people at Berkeley found this out a couple weeks back:
Male Sweat Boosts Women's Hormone Levels
"Just a few whiffs of a chemical found in male sweat is enough to raise levels of the stress hormone cortisol in heterosexual women, according to a new study by University of California, Berkeley, scientists.
The study, reported this week in The Journal of Neuroscience, provides the first direct evidence that humans, like rats, moths and butterflies, secrete a scent that affects the physiology of the opposite sex.
"This is the first time anyone has demonstrated that a change in women's hormonal levels is induced by sniffing an identified compound of male sweat," as opposed to applying a chemical to the upper lip, said study leader Claire Wyart, a post-doctoral fellow at UC Berkeley.
The team's work was inspired by previous studies by Wyart's colleague Noam Sobel, associate professor of psychology at UC Berkeley and director of the Berkeley Olfactory Research Program. He found that the chemical androstadienone - a compound found in male sweat and an additive in perfumes and colognes - changed mood, sexual arousal, physiological arousal and brain activation in women.
Yet, contrary to perfume company advertisements, there is no hard evidence that humans respond to the smell of androstadienone or any other chemical in a subliminal or instinctual way similar to the way many mammals and even insects respond to pheromones, Wyart said. Though some humans exhibit a small patch inside their nose resembling the vomeronasal organ in rats that detects pheromones, it appears to be vestigial, with no nerve connection to the brain."
More:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070207172019.htm
Posted by: Rodney Reid | February 20, 2007 at 02:29 AM
Hi Rodney Reid,
Elaine is the one who's on the big pheromone quest here, rather than I. She takes on everything from the Great Attractor to biochemistry to economic military studies here, which is wonderful. And the pheromone questions are far from settled.
More interesting to me is the manner of how people sort these issues out. We gather evidence, and then arrive at (often hasty) conclusions and consensuses. In my own life, I have made the fabulous discovery that the mere trial of a random new method often leads to some great new tool, which would have been missed had I merely continued in old footsteps. But few people ever make such an effort. I have often noted that dogs have the ability to alter their routines at random, while almost every human remains in hisorher same old ruts from age 20 till age 100. This is a very good reason to become a shamen to become a wolf. Sorcerers endeavor to make use of such creatures, but shamens become them, thus acquiring their ability to shift into novel innovations.
Getting back to the sexual issues, there seem to be four kinds of social approaches. There is the habit of sexual anarchy, which tends to be held in low esteem generally. Perhaps somewhat better, there is the application of sexual royalism, wherein people tend to respond to respond to various one-up-personships, a rather snooty style. There is a family unit method, which often leads to chaotic familial relationships. And there is the tribal approach, wherein the whole tribe is moreorless the family; it is probably the most healthy approach.
Many of the sexual strategies have motivate some of the greatest achievements in other areas. This is often the case where the sexual approach encourages the doing of great deeds. But this collides with the sad human tendency to follow old ruts, wearing them in deeper and deeper to the point where a society succumbs to more innovative usurpers. The best society would have shamens and explorers, but I doubt that such a culture has ever stood the test of time. The shamens degenerate into brutal ministers, and the explorers become mere curators of stale old maps.
Too bad this whole crucial issue has been usurped by academic pedagogues who have divvied it all up into 'sociology', anthropology, economics, public relations, political science, what-have-you.
We need yet another fresh start. And I'm working on that. (But maybe I should publish my already completed linguistics and maths projects first, huh?)
Posted by: blues | February 20, 2007 at 05:42 AM
"But maybe I should publish my already completed linguistics and maths projects first, huh?"
That would seem to be the major problem with your "savant-y" types: getting 'em to focus on one thing long enough to type up some results.
Posted by: JSmith | February 20, 2007 at 10:43 AM
I have them all typed up right here (well mostly). (Deeply encrypted.) The thing is, I know exactly what you "unsavant-y" types are likely to do with them.
Posted by: blues | February 20, 2007 at 01:02 PM
Auntie Samanty here!
Thanks for all the comments and links. I read them because I learn from them. No one knows everything and few people know anything. I wasn't nearly so 'smart' before the internet: search engines save lots of time...I don't have to go on the subway to the main library in Manhattan on the East Side to give a slip to some librarians to dig out books for me.
I hope all books end up online. I would dearly love that.
Posted by: Elaine Meinel Supkis | February 20, 2007 at 05:03 PM
Posted by: Heel | July 19, 2007 at 07:28 PM
Posted by: Bill | July 21, 2007 at 03:42 AM