When Healing Becomes Educating, Vol. 1 - Waldorf Research Institute

In 1953 Watson and Crick published their epoch-making double helix
hypothesis 33 and thus first stated that the creation of identical DNA copies
was ex plainable by such a double-stranded DNA structure. In 1958 Meselson
and Stahl proved the existence of this copying process, which is known as
semi-conservative replication. Since 1961 the dependence of proteins on
DNA has been unraveled more and more, after the genetic code and ever
more details of protein biosynthesis were discovered. Thus the foundation
was laid for today’s generally recognized explanation of inherited protein
characteristics from the genetic material.
Yet already in 1958 Crick had formulated his so-called central dogma
of genetics which states that transfer of information is only possible from
DNA to protein but that reverse transfer from protein to DNA does not
occur. Crick once summarized this dogma as follows: “The central dogma
is a negative statement... a hypothesis which says that you can’t translate
backwards ... (that is) from protein to DNA or from protein to RNA.” 6
Today in 1988 this central dogma is still the foundation stone of
molecular biological theory and is therewith also the foundation of current
views about living things even though this dogma has been refuted by the
facts for some time. I would like to present these facts in what follows:
1. The central dogma attributes all characteristics of living things to
DNA, that is, to one substance. Therefore one sees the chemical explanation
of life in it, 6 especially now that the details of the genetic code and of protein
biosynthesis are known. The genetic code is based on the fact that a specific
sequence of 3 nucleotides on the DNA strand corresponds to a specific
amino acid in a protein chain or in the so-called gene product. Therefore
one calls this DNA base triplet the information carrier for a specific amino
acid on the protein thread, and we now know that the primary structure of
the protein, or the beginning sequence and ending of the amino acids on
the protein chain, is completely determined by the sequence of base triplets
on the DNA strand. In this way the protein’s growth is “explained” by the
genetic material, i.e., we have a “chemical explanation of life.”
But one can ask whether the uninterrupted decoding of the gene
expression really does result in a chemical—and therefore material—
explanation of protein or even of life.
2. One can answer this question unequivocally if one becomes aware
of the difference between the material information-carrier as such and the
infor mation as such which is “coded” by this substance. This distinction is
very important, but unfortunately it is often made in an inadequate way by
73