Reproduction

Download Subtitles

Transcript

0:00:02 > 0:00:05DNA, sexual attraction, inheritance. Bicycles. Polish vodka.

0:00:05 > 0:00:08Tonight, we talk about how we make new life. Tonight we talk about

0:00:08 > 0:00:09how YOU were made.

0:00:09 > 0:00:12My name is Dara O Briain. Welcome to Science Club.

0:00:12 > 0:00:13CHEERING AND APPLAUSE

0:00:33 > 0:00:35CHEERING AND APPLAUSE

0:00:35 > 0:00:37Welcome and good evening.

0:00:37 > 0:00:39In our audience, curious people are here. Some fine minds.

0:00:39 > 0:00:43Professor Steve Jones, thank you for joining us.

0:00:43 > 0:00:44We'll discuss genetics later.

0:00:44 > 0:00:49We'll have reports from Alok Jha and Tali Sharot. Ed Byrne will join us.

0:00:49 > 0:00:52- You've got something for us?- I'll toss something into your gene pool.

0:00:52 > 0:00:55Lovely. Very appetising.

0:00:55 > 0:00:57We'll do an experiment with Mark Miodownik

0:00:57 > 0:00:59that you can repeat at home.

0:00:59 > 0:01:02But so to sex. As a method of passing on our DNA,

0:01:02 > 0:01:05it is more fun than spitting into a cup.

0:01:05 > 0:01:08Once that moment has passed, is it the best way to move

0:01:08 > 0:01:09this species along?

0:01:09 > 0:01:13We put sex and inheritance under the microscope.

0:01:13 > 0:01:17Here at my new science club, we'll probe the topic

0:01:17 > 0:01:19in all sorts of different ways

0:01:19 > 0:01:23while neuro-scientist Tali Sharot asks can we pass on traits

0:01:23 > 0:01:25that aren't in our genes?

0:01:25 > 0:01:27This is a new frontier of medicine.

0:01:27 > 0:01:30Science journalist Alok Jha questions if the Genome Project

0:01:30 > 0:01:33was all it was cracked up to be.

0:01:33 > 0:01:37We did not overstate the case. We said this would be key to medicine.

0:01:37 > 0:01:39That's absolutely right.

0:01:39 > 0:01:42Comedian Ed Byrne gets to grips with his Neanderthal family history.

0:01:43 > 0:01:48I don't mean to disrespect her but would our breeding with Neanderthal

0:01:48 > 0:01:51have coincided at all with the invention of alcohol?

0:01:52 > 0:01:54Professor Mark Miodownik takes the technological view

0:01:54 > 0:01:59by pulling a bike apart and showing how they've influenced

0:01:59 > 0:02:00our sexual selection.

0:02:00 > 0:02:03All this and more in this week's Science Club.

0:02:03 > 0:02:06APPLAUSE

0:02:06 > 0:02:11While you're watching, you can get facts and doodles by following...

0:02:11 > 0:02:13or going to our website.

0:02:13 > 0:02:16When it comes to passing on genes from one generation to the next,

0:02:16 > 0:02:18it's only been the last 100 years

0:02:18 > 0:02:20that we've understood what goes on.

0:02:20 > 0:02:23One of life's great mysteries and this is what we used to think.

0:02:25 > 0:02:28The story of inheritance begins, like many things,

0:02:28 > 0:02:30with the ancient Greeks.

0:02:30 > 0:02:34Aristotle, fresh from inventing logic itself,

0:02:34 > 0:02:36noted that children often looked like their parents.

0:02:36 > 0:02:40Aristotle decided that the man determined the form of the child,

0:02:40 > 0:02:43whilst the woman provided the material.

0:02:43 > 0:02:47He planted the seed, she provided the soil that fed it.

0:02:47 > 0:02:51For hundreds of years, this was as far as people got.

0:02:51 > 0:02:54The first clues to what goes on inside women,

0:02:54 > 0:02:56came in the 1600s.

0:02:56 > 0:03:00Two Dutch medics announced that women produced eggs, like birds.

0:03:02 > 0:03:06A few years later, another Dutchman, a fabric merchant,

0:03:06 > 0:03:08made a startling discovery by examining

0:03:08 > 0:03:12the contents of his trousers with a primitive microscope.

0:03:12 > 0:03:15Semen seemed to be full of tiny creatures

0:03:15 > 0:03:16that thrashed around like a snake.

0:03:16 > 0:03:19He had discovered sperm.

0:03:20 > 0:03:24Most people thought babies must start off as perfect miniatures,

0:03:24 > 0:03:26inside either egg or sperm.

0:03:26 > 0:03:29But no-one knew which.

0:03:29 > 0:03:32By the 1800s, the inheritance question

0:03:32 > 0:03:36took another leap forward, thanks to some farmers.

0:03:36 > 0:03:39Men like Robert Bakewell were a new breed,

0:03:39 > 0:03:40who saw sheep as machines,

0:03:40 > 0:03:43for turning grass into money.

0:03:43 > 0:03:46He bred his best males with his best females.

0:03:46 > 0:03:51The resulting super sheep suggested offspring were a mixture

0:03:51 > 0:03:52of their parents.

0:03:52 > 0:03:55Naturally, it wasn't quite that simple.

0:03:58 > 0:04:00In Austria, a monk called Gregor Mendel,

0:04:00 > 0:04:03had spent years breeding pea plants -

0:04:03 > 0:04:06tall with short, yellow with green.

0:04:06 > 0:04:09His results suggested that instead of a simple blend,

0:04:09 > 0:04:14each offspring received one element for height or colour

0:04:14 > 0:04:18from each of its parents but that one could override the other.

0:04:18 > 0:04:24By 1909, Mendel's elements had been renamed genes.

0:04:24 > 0:04:26A year later, whilst breeding flies,

0:04:26 > 0:04:31Thomas Morgan showed these genes lived on tiny structures

0:04:31 > 0:04:34inside the cell - the chromosomes.

0:04:34 > 0:04:37The science of genetics has been born.

0:04:38 > 0:04:41Scientists delved deeper until Watson and Crick finally revealed

0:04:41 > 0:04:43the double helix of DNA.

0:04:43 > 0:04:46So how does inheritance work?

0:04:46 > 0:04:49Put simply, we receive half our dad's chromosomes

0:04:49 > 0:04:53from the sperm and half of our mum's from the egg.

0:04:53 > 0:04:57On these chromosomes are genes, pieces of DNA containing

0:04:57 > 0:04:58the instructions to make our bodies.

0:04:58 > 0:05:01They are the basic units of inheritance

0:05:01 > 0:05:04and affect whether we, our children and our children's children

0:05:04 > 0:05:09end up short, tall, blue-eyed, curly-haired or bald.

0:05:10 > 0:05:12APPLAUSE

0:05:14 > 0:05:16Those are the basics. To explain more,

0:05:16 > 0:05:18let me welcome our guest tonight.

0:05:18 > 0:05:23A genetics expert, a broadcaster and a man who's furthered our knowledge

0:05:23 > 0:05:25of natural selection.

0:05:25 > 0:05:27He is Emeritus Professor of Genetics at University of London

0:05:27 > 0:05:31and one of the world's greatest experts in the love life of snails.

0:05:31 > 0:05:32Professor Steve Jones.

0:05:32 > 0:05:34CHEERING AND APPLAUSE

0:05:40 > 0:05:43It's difficult to know where to start on a subject

0:05:43 > 0:05:44as massive as this.

0:05:44 > 0:05:47We said it would be about sex. Does sex work?

0:05:47 > 0:05:50Is it efficient? Is it the best we could have done?

0:05:50 > 0:05:52It's messy but it works.

0:05:52 > 0:05:55I start my genetics course by saying,

0:05:55 > 0:05:56"I'm a geneticist

0:05:56 > 0:05:59"and my job is to make sex boring."

0:05:59 > 0:06:03It's an inefficient mechanism because what it means is

0:06:03 > 0:06:07that women waste their time copying someone else's genes.

0:06:07 > 0:06:10Why they should do that is the biggest mystery in biology.

0:06:10 > 0:06:13Why do women allow men to get away with it?

0:06:13 > 0:06:15I've no idea.

0:06:15 > 0:06:17It's a mystery.

0:06:17 > 0:06:18Because we're so charming!

0:06:18 > 0:06:21Is it almost over-engineered?

0:06:21 > 0:06:25The competition for attention, all these mechanisms

0:06:25 > 0:06:26that have come around sex?

0:06:26 > 0:06:29If life had been designed, if there had been a creator,

0:06:29 > 0:06:30we wouldn't have sex.

0:06:30 > 0:06:33Anybody who designed that wouldn't deserve a job.

0:06:33 > 0:06:35People who like creators dislike sex anyway.

0:06:38 > 0:06:42There was a scientist called Lazzaro Spallanzani,

0:06:42 > 0:06:44are you familiar with his work?

0:06:44 > 0:06:48He was one of the first ones who said sperm was important,

0:06:48 > 0:06:50in a series of exciting experiments

0:06:50 > 0:06:53in which in order to remove the sperm from the equation.

0:06:53 > 0:06:56While frogs mated, he created,

0:06:56 > 0:06:59from male frogs, tight-fitting trousers

0:06:59 > 0:07:01that he stretched around their legs

0:07:01 > 0:07:04so that the sperm would not escape and let them mate,

0:07:04 > 0:07:06- let them rub off each other but not mate.- That's right.

0:07:06 > 0:07:11That was a proper experiment with a hypothesis of theory

0:07:11 > 0:07:14that this stuff called sperm, which nobody knew what it did.

0:07:14 > 0:07:17Many people thought it was the only thing that mattered.

0:07:17 > 0:07:20They thought that the female was just an incubator,

0:07:20 > 0:07:22in which the baby grew up.

0:07:22 > 0:07:24All the information came from the sperm.

0:07:24 > 0:07:26That was a proper, clean experiment.

0:07:26 > 0:07:28Hurrah for Spallanzani, in spite of the trousers.

0:07:28 > 0:07:31Let me ask you about the ways we've dispersed -

0:07:31 > 0:07:36as we have moved, we have mixed our genes more,

0:07:36 > 0:07:38even on a town-to-town basis.

0:07:38 > 0:07:39You have a theory about bicycles.

0:07:39 > 0:07:41I once said - and it's haunted me ever since -

0:07:41 > 0:07:44the most important event in human evolution

0:07:44 > 0:07:46was the invention of the bicycle.

0:07:46 > 0:07:50There is some reason behind that.

0:07:50 > 0:07:53What the bicycle did, you no longer had to have

0:07:53 > 0:07:57sex with the boy or girl next door because you had no choice,

0:07:57 > 0:08:00you were in a little village, you couldn't move.

0:08:00 > 0:08:02You could get on your bicycle and have sex with

0:08:02 > 0:08:04the boy or girl in the next village.

0:08:04 > 0:08:08Now, you can get on your 747 and have sex with the boy or girl

0:08:08 > 0:08:09in the next continent.

0:08:09 > 0:08:11What that's done, it's turned, very rapidly

0:08:11 > 0:08:15turning the human race into a kind of soup.

0:08:15 > 0:08:18We're rapidly becoming much less different from each other

0:08:18 > 0:08:21across the world than we were even 100 years ago.

0:08:21 > 0:08:25Arguably, that's the most important event in the last 100,000 years

0:08:25 > 0:08:27of human evolution.

0:08:27 > 0:08:29We knew about Steve's bicycle theory.

0:08:29 > 0:08:33When we realised the bicycle played such a pivotal role in history,

0:08:33 > 0:08:34we thought sod the genetics,

0:08:34 > 0:08:36let's understand why it's such a brilliant invention.

0:08:36 > 0:08:38Here's Mark Miodownik.

0:08:44 > 0:08:46You may think the bike is a relic of the past.

0:08:46 > 0:08:50But it's one of the most beautiful pieces of machinery we've created.

0:08:50 > 0:08:52It shaped society in surprising ways.

0:08:52 > 0:08:57That's because it's affordable and extremely efficient.

0:08:59 > 0:09:03It had a huge impact because for the first time,

0:09:03 > 0:09:05it facilitated travel for the masses.

0:09:05 > 0:09:08Unlike horses and trains,

0:09:08 > 0:09:09it didn't need feeding or stabling.

0:09:11 > 0:09:13You didn't need to buy a ticket or run to a timetable.

0:09:16 > 0:09:18It's simple and incredibly efficient.

0:09:20 > 0:09:22That's down to how the wheels, pedals and chain

0:09:22 > 0:09:24all combine together.

0:09:26 > 0:09:29Two key features are responsible for the bike's efficiency -

0:09:29 > 0:09:32the chain drive and the wheels.

0:09:34 > 0:09:38Although the wheel is one of humankind's best inventions,

0:09:38 > 0:09:40early versions were a bit clunky.

0:09:40 > 0:09:42The stone wheels much too heavy.

0:09:42 > 0:09:44The wooden wheel much too unreliable.

0:09:44 > 0:09:47But this, the bicycle wheel,

0:09:47 > 0:09:51this is one of our best yet.

0:09:51 > 0:09:54Elegant, light and extremely strong.

0:09:55 > 0:09:59Original spokes are thick because they work under compression.

0:09:59 > 0:10:01Bicycle spokes are too thin for that

0:10:01 > 0:10:02and can easily buckle.

0:10:02 > 0:10:06Instead, they have been engineered to work under tension.

0:10:06 > 0:10:08Although none of the spokes are capable of holding

0:10:08 > 0:10:11your weight individually, they are quite weak.

0:10:11 > 0:10:12Because there are lots of spokes,

0:10:12 > 0:10:17they are held in tension so this suspends the axle

0:10:17 > 0:10:21in all directions so they are all taking their turn

0:10:21 > 0:10:23to hold a bit of you up in the air.

0:10:23 > 0:10:26This continues as the wheel rotates.

0:10:26 > 0:10:30The lightweight spoked wheel transformed the bike

0:10:30 > 0:10:36from a mere curiosity into a viable means of transport.

0:10:36 > 0:10:37For wheels to move, they need power

0:10:37 > 0:10:40and that's where the pedals come in.

0:10:40 > 0:10:42Early bicycles like this penny-farthing

0:10:42 > 0:10:44had the pedals attached to the hub.

0:10:44 > 0:10:48This meant that larger wheels were a primitive form of gearing

0:10:48 > 0:10:51because the larger the wheel, the further you went

0:10:51 > 0:10:53for one turn of the pedals.

0:10:53 > 0:10:56This had the downside that you were further from the ground,

0:10:56 > 0:10:57which was precarious at best

0:10:57 > 0:11:00but mostly downright dangerous.

0:11:00 > 0:11:03The ordinary bicycle, as it was then known,

0:11:03 > 0:11:05was pretty much for men only.

0:11:05 > 0:11:09But one simple addition made bikes suitable for everybody to ride.

0:11:09 > 0:11:12This is the ladies' safety bike.

0:11:12 > 0:11:14It's over 100 years old.

0:11:14 > 0:11:18It's characteristic feature is a chain, hidden beneath this guard.

0:11:18 > 0:11:22It's the safety bike that allowed everyone - men and women -

0:11:22 > 0:11:25to move more freely and further than ever before.

0:11:25 > 0:11:29It's popularity was linked to falling church attendances,

0:11:29 > 0:11:31to the decline of piano playing

0:11:31 > 0:11:34and new courting standards amongst the young.

0:11:34 > 0:11:36It was a sexual revolution,

0:11:36 > 0:11:39albeit one aided by a piece of engineering.

0:11:43 > 0:11:45The introduction of the chain drive

0:11:45 > 0:11:48Created a different sort of gearing from the penny farthing

0:11:48 > 0:11:51so now, one turn of the pedals

0:11:51 > 0:11:53can turn the back wheel many times,

0:11:53 > 0:11:55allowing you to go further for the same effort

0:11:55 > 0:11:58and that meant you could have two wheels of the same size

0:11:58 > 0:12:00and that made it much more comfortable,

0:12:00 > 0:12:02much safer and more efficient

0:12:02 > 0:12:06but they had one further trick up their sleeve -

0:12:06 > 0:12:07the freewheel.

0:12:07 > 0:12:12So you could stop peddling altogether and still get there. Genius.

0:12:12 > 0:12:15APPLAUSE

0:12:15 > 0:12:17Mark, thank you very much.

0:12:17 > 0:12:20It's a bit of a miracle that we can even ride bikes, isn't it?

0:12:20 > 0:12:24Well, I think the miracle is that we created this machine

0:12:24 > 0:12:27that's stabilised and can ride itself.

0:12:27 > 0:12:31You can actually throw a bike in a direction without a rider

0:12:31 > 0:12:34and it will self-balance for 100 yards, and it's extraordinary.

0:12:34 > 0:12:37We didn't realise, and we still don't really understand why that is.

0:12:37 > 0:12:39With regard to your theory, by the way,

0:12:39 > 0:12:42that these opened up genetic diversity,

0:12:42 > 0:12:44why is genetic diversity important?

0:12:44 > 0:12:47Well, genetic diversity is the raw material of evolution.

0:12:47 > 0:12:49If there was no genetic diversity, we'd all still be...

0:12:49 > 0:12:51We would all still BE the primeval slime.

0:12:51 > 0:12:56Evolution is inherited differences in the ability to reproduce.

0:12:56 > 0:12:59That's natural selection and the word is differences.

0:12:59 > 0:13:02Without differences, you can't have genetics or evolution.

0:13:02 > 0:13:05OK, so the last 150 years of mass migrations

0:13:05 > 0:13:09will have had a huge effect in terms of...an evolutionary effect?

0:13:09 > 0:13:12Sure. If you walk through the streets of London today,

0:13:12 > 0:13:14you will see a genetically different population

0:13:14 > 0:13:16from what you would have seen a century ago,

0:13:16 > 0:13:18even when I was a kid, almost a century ago.

0:13:18 > 0:13:22One of the ways you can see the effect of this moving business,

0:13:22 > 0:13:25and maybe everybody in this room can ask themselves the question -

0:13:25 > 0:13:27how far apart... And everybody watching the show.

0:13:27 > 0:13:31How far apart were you born from your partner, if you have one,

0:13:31 > 0:13:33compared to how far apart your mother and father were born,

0:13:33 > 0:13:35compared to how far apart your mother's mother

0:13:35 > 0:13:38and your mother's father was born, and so on.

0:13:38 > 0:13:41What you'll find generally speaking, that figure, the marital distance,

0:13:41 > 0:13:44get enormously bigger over the last three or four generations.

0:13:44 > 0:13:46- Miodownik, by the way, not a London name.- No.

0:13:46 > 0:13:49- How many generations back? - Polish to two generations.

0:13:49 > 0:13:51As a matter of interest, just because

0:13:51 > 0:13:54we have a spread of predominantly young London people here,

0:13:54 > 0:13:56who would win that prize, by the way,

0:13:56 > 0:13:59in terms of how far apart their parents were from?

0:13:59 > 0:14:03What's the most racially diverse, ethnically... Yourself at the back?

0:14:03 > 0:14:05Mongolia and Ireland.

0:14:05 > 0:14:08How did they meet?

0:14:08 > 0:14:11What weird social gathering...? Where did they meet? Here?

0:14:11 > 0:14:12In Mongolia.

0:14:12 > 0:14:15At the airport, actually.

0:14:15 > 0:14:16- They met at the airport?- Yeah.

0:14:16 > 0:14:19- No, they were both working at the airport.- Oh, right,

0:14:19 > 0:14:23it just seemed like your dad from Ireland just swept into Mongolia...

0:14:23 > 0:14:26- No, no!- But that's what? 8,000 miles of a difference,

0:14:26 > 0:14:29Mongolian and Irish, any rarer? Yourself there at the back?

0:14:29 > 0:14:32Yep, so Austrian, Lebanese and a little bit of Spanish.

0:14:32 > 0:14:35Austria, Lebanon and a bit of Spain?

0:14:35 > 0:14:40It's the bit of Spain I'm intrigued by. Why was that guy there?

0:14:40 > 0:14:44Was he just a guy on a guitar at the night in question? OK, fantastic.

0:14:44 > 0:14:47Any more diverse than that? And yourself there?

0:14:47 > 0:14:49UK and Vietnam.

0:14:49 > 0:14:52UK and Vietnam, OK, grand. So this has become more and more the case,

0:14:52 > 0:14:56so genetically, when we're talking about, at the very fundamentals,

0:14:56 > 0:14:59you take genes that have come from very, very far apart,

0:14:59 > 0:15:01you're removing the danger of mutations?

0:15:01 > 0:15:04Well, no, it's not quite like that.

0:15:04 > 0:15:07I mean, there are some inherited genetic diseases,

0:15:07 > 0:15:11which are simple diseases, which most genetic diseases are not,

0:15:11 > 0:15:13most of them are very complicated,

0:15:13 > 0:15:16which just demand two copies of the same damaged gene, OK?

0:15:16 > 0:15:20Many people will have heard of a famous one called cystic fibrosis.

0:15:20 > 0:15:23About one birth in 2,500 in Britain,

0:15:23 > 0:15:28about one person in 25 in Britain carries a single copy.

0:15:28 > 0:15:29Now, if you happen to think

0:15:29 > 0:15:32that you might carry a single copy of this gene,

0:15:32 > 0:15:35and now you can be tested very easily, but that's new,

0:15:35 > 0:15:36and you were very, very worried

0:15:36 > 0:15:39that perhaps your partner might have a single copy

0:15:39 > 0:15:41and you might have an affected child

0:15:41 > 0:15:44a geneticist's advice would be, marry a Nigerian

0:15:44 > 0:15:46because there's no cystic fibrosis in Nigeria

0:15:46 > 0:15:50and it might be that with all this amazing mixing across the globe,

0:15:50 > 0:15:54we've actually entered somewhat of an era of genetic health.

0:15:54 > 0:15:56The idea that mixing is bad is probably wrong.

0:15:56 > 0:15:58Mixing is probably good.

0:15:58 > 0:15:59The world does seem to be our oyster

0:15:59 > 0:16:01as far as the genetic pool is concerned

0:16:01 > 0:16:04but attraction is a strange and mysterious thing

0:16:04 > 0:16:06and a burning question we have to ask is,

0:16:06 > 0:16:10taken as a random sample, how attractive is our studio audience?

0:16:10 > 0:16:14As the audience came in tonight, one of our researchers took a photo.

0:16:14 > 0:16:16There's a few of them popping up behind me here.

0:16:16 > 0:16:18Well, that's me, obviously.

0:16:18 > 0:16:21That may drag down the average. What we're going to do

0:16:21 > 0:16:24is that there are various theories about attractiveness

0:16:24 > 0:16:28involving symmetry, whether symmetry reflects a genetic strength,

0:16:28 > 0:16:31whether if we average across all of the faces,

0:16:31 > 0:16:35that we will remove some of those asymmetries and whether if we get an average face,

0:16:35 > 0:16:37it will be more attractive then on average.

0:16:37 > 0:16:40We'll work that out and show you a face at the end of the show.

0:16:40 > 0:16:43In case you think we're being brutal and impersonal here,

0:16:43 > 0:16:46reducing you all down to one thing, it's worth reminding yourselves,

0:16:46 > 0:16:48even though we say we're all different,

0:16:48 > 0:16:50there's only a part of us, which is unique.

0:16:50 > 0:16:51We have some pretty close cousins.

0:16:51 > 0:16:55It takes a very specific set of genes to make a human.

0:16:55 > 0:16:57Compare two humans and you'll find

0:16:57 > 0:16:59their DNA will be almost identical,

0:16:59 > 0:17:02to 99.9%, in fact.

0:17:02 > 0:17:05Much of our DNA is, as you might expect,

0:17:05 > 0:17:07also similar to other primates.

0:17:07 > 0:17:09It's up to 99% for a chimp,

0:17:09 > 0:17:1197% for an orang-utan

0:17:11 > 0:17:14and 95% for a macaque.

0:17:14 > 0:17:18On average, 85% of compared human and mouse genes are identical.

0:17:18 > 0:17:20In fact, it's also been said

0:17:20 > 0:17:22that 50% of our DNA is shared with a banana

0:17:22 > 0:17:25but how many genes do you reckon a banana has?

0:17:25 > 0:17:28A simple bacteria has around 4,000 genes,

0:17:28 > 0:17:31yeast, a fungus, has about 6,000,

0:17:31 > 0:17:34the honey bee over 10,000,

0:17:34 > 0:17:38a fruit fly has roughly 14,000 genes,

0:17:38 > 0:17:41a sea sponge about 18,000,

0:17:41 > 0:17:43this frog has around 21,000.

0:17:43 > 0:17:47A mouse has about 23,000

0:17:47 > 0:17:49and so do we.

0:17:49 > 0:17:53But a tomato has over 30,000 genes.

0:17:53 > 0:17:56A water flea has nearly 31,000

0:17:56 > 0:17:59and that banana - over 36,000 genes,

0:17:59 > 0:18:02which is half as much again as we do.

0:18:04 > 0:18:07APPLAUSE

0:18:07 > 0:18:10Steve, this was never my field of expertise.

0:18:10 > 0:18:12Correct me if I'm wrong on any of those points.

0:18:12 > 0:18:15Are we overestimating some of those comparisons?

0:18:15 > 0:18:18Well, you're getting into deep water when you talk about genes

0:18:18 > 0:18:21as the big surprise for all those creatures, including the banana,

0:18:21 > 0:18:24is how few genes in the traditional sense there are -

0:18:24 > 0:18:2724,000, which is far, far fewer than anybody thought

0:18:27 > 0:18:30and when you talk about a 4% difference between us and the chimp,

0:18:30 > 0:18:34it's still hundreds of thousands of differences in the DNA

0:18:34 > 0:18:37and we know that a single change in one single DNA letter

0:18:37 > 0:18:40can turn you, for example, into somebody who's very short

0:18:40 > 0:18:41with achrondoplasia, a dwarf,

0:18:41 > 0:18:44or a giant, or give you a terrible genetic disease

0:18:44 > 0:18:46or change your skin colour,

0:18:46 > 0:18:49so these are really quite big differences, actually.

0:18:49 > 0:18:51We have a simple test here,

0:18:51 > 0:18:54which apparently is the indicator of one particular gene.

0:18:54 > 0:18:57Now, if you could just spread one of those samples sheets out.

0:18:57 > 0:19:00Some people have a variant that allows them to pick up

0:19:00 > 0:19:03this particular scent. We know where the gene is, and some people

0:19:03 > 0:19:05have variants that mean they can't smell it.

0:19:05 > 0:19:07It'd be interesting to test the population

0:19:07 > 0:19:10- to see how many of the different kinds we have.- Take one, pass it on.

0:19:10 > 0:19:13Some of you will be able to smell this and some won't.

0:19:13 > 0:19:16Some of you will find it pleasant and some will find it unpleasant.

0:19:16 > 0:19:18- No? Smell blind.- Nothing.

0:19:18 > 0:19:21Nothing, nothing. Is anyone getting a smell off that?

0:19:21 > 0:19:23Yeah? Are you? What kind of smell are you getting?

0:19:23 > 0:19:24It's not very distinctive.

0:19:24 > 0:19:27Sorry, excuse me. What kind of smell are you getting?

0:19:27 > 0:19:30It's not that distinctive. It's not good or bad, kind of...I don't know.

0:19:30 > 0:19:33Would you describe it as being like any other smell?

0:19:33 > 0:19:36- Chemically?- It's chemically? OK, grand. Hmm.

0:19:36 > 0:19:39Chemically is everything, really, isn't it? Bit difficult...

0:19:39 > 0:19:42- I shouldn't say that as a scientist. - Yeah, I know!

0:19:42 > 0:19:44Anyone else? Can anyone get a smell off it?

0:19:44 > 0:19:46- You can. What sort of smell? - Really unpleasant.

0:19:46 > 0:19:48You're finding it unpleasant?

0:19:48 > 0:19:50- Yeah. I'd say sweat.- Sweat?- Yeah.

0:19:50 > 0:19:53- Possibly urine, maybe?- Potentially.

0:19:53 > 0:19:56Potentially, OK, grand. I'm not going to force your hand on that.

0:19:56 > 0:19:58How many of you aren't getting this at all?

0:19:59 > 0:20:02Majority. So we'll only get a couple who are seeing it

0:20:02 > 0:20:05and how many of you are getting any smell at all? You are, you are.

0:20:05 > 0:20:09- Quite a few.- A few over there, seven or eight, a few at the back.

0:20:09 > 0:20:11- Shout out, what word would you use to describe it?- Wee.

0:20:11 > 0:20:13Wee? Wee.

0:20:13 > 0:20:16Anybody getting, is there anyone getting a sweeter smell?

0:20:18 > 0:20:20You are? You're getting the sweet smell? OK.

0:20:20 > 0:20:23See, these are all different reactions from the same gene.

0:20:23 > 0:20:26- Yeah, they are.- By the way, to explain what it is,

0:20:26 > 0:20:29this is Boarmate, the boar odour spray.

0:20:29 > 0:20:31LAUGHTER

0:20:31 > 0:20:33B-O-A-R, by the way. I'll let you get that.

0:20:33 > 0:20:35If you're looking for a boar odour spray,

0:20:35 > 0:20:37I can't recommend this one highly enough.

0:20:37 > 0:20:41And the purpose of Boarmate, by the way, it's used to determine

0:20:41 > 0:20:45whether or not a sow is at the correct stage of oestrus

0:20:45 > 0:20:47for artificial insemination,

0:20:47 > 0:20:49and by the way, in a test,

0:20:49 > 0:20:53you don't ask the pig, "Do you get that? Are you getting that smell?"

0:20:53 > 0:20:55For us, it means nothing.

0:20:55 > 0:20:57I'm just reassuring those of you who raised your hand,

0:20:57 > 0:21:00- it means nothing, other than... - As far as we know.

0:21:00 > 0:21:02As far as we know. Thanks.

0:21:02 > 0:21:04I'm trying to reassure the nice ladies who smelt it.

0:21:04 > 0:21:06I'm thrilled to read on the back,

0:21:06 > 0:21:08"Avoid spraying Boarmate on hands or clothing,"

0:21:08 > 0:21:09like I just have five times.

0:21:09 > 0:21:13"Wash hands immediately after use and change affected clothing."

0:21:13 > 0:21:15Great, well, if we hear the sound of little footsteps,

0:21:15 > 0:21:18it'll be pigs racing towards me in a state of excitement.

0:21:18 > 0:21:21Now, it was 12 years ago that the human genome was sequenced

0:21:21 > 0:21:25and it was fanfared as one of the most significant events in science

0:21:25 > 0:21:27or in human history at the time

0:21:27 > 0:21:30but was it? What has decoding the human genome ever done for us?

0:21:30 > 0:21:32Alok Jha investigates.

0:21:37 > 0:21:39Here they are -

0:21:39 > 0:21:43more than 100 volumes containing all the instructions you need

0:21:43 > 0:21:46to make an average human being.

0:21:46 > 0:21:48This is the most important,

0:21:48 > 0:21:51most wondrous map ever produced by humankind.

0:21:57 > 0:22:00A revolution in medical science

0:22:00 > 0:22:05whose implications far surpass even the discovery of antibiotics.

0:22:20 > 0:22:22But what now?

0:22:22 > 0:22:27What use has all this information been out there in the real world?

0:22:30 > 0:22:33Nobel prizewinner John Sulston

0:22:33 > 0:22:36was instrumental in delivering the Human Genome Project, or HGP.

0:22:39 > 0:22:43John, why have so few of the promises from the Human Genome Project

0:22:43 > 0:22:46actually emerged?

0:22:46 > 0:22:47Well, as far as I was concerned,

0:22:47 > 0:22:51these promises, if you'd like to call them that, or predictions,

0:22:51 > 0:22:53were very long-term.

0:22:53 > 0:22:56But the point is that we had read the code of instructions

0:22:56 > 0:22:57to make a human being

0:22:57 > 0:23:00but I had no idea how long it would take to understand.

0:23:00 > 0:23:01Indeed, we found that the whole thing

0:23:01 > 0:23:04was a great deal more complex than we could have imagined.

0:23:04 > 0:23:08Was there an element of scientists leading us along just a little bit,

0:23:08 > 0:23:11just to justify the millions of pounds and dollars being spent?

0:23:11 > 0:23:13Well, I'm arguing, Alok,

0:23:13 > 0:23:15that we did not overstate the case.

0:23:15 > 0:23:19We said it was important, we said this would be key to medicine.

0:23:19 > 0:23:20I think that's absolutely right.

0:23:20 > 0:23:24It's because we have the sequence, because we can now learn

0:23:24 > 0:23:26how one sort of cancer is different from another,

0:23:26 > 0:23:30how every single tumour probably turns out to be somewhat different,

0:23:30 > 0:23:33but we have the means, the tools to analyse it, and indeed,

0:23:33 > 0:23:36precisely because we've discovered

0:23:36 > 0:23:39it's so much more complex than anybody could have imagined,

0:23:39 > 0:23:41with different classes of genes,

0:23:41 > 0:23:44which have only been made accessible as a result of the work.

0:23:44 > 0:23:46I think it's justified more than ever.

0:23:46 > 0:23:49There's no doubt that the human genome project has been great

0:23:49 > 0:23:51for fundamental science,

0:23:51 > 0:23:56but, so far, its direct contribution to medicine is far from clear.

0:23:56 > 0:23:59Should we believe scientists' promises?

0:23:59 > 0:24:03I mean, they don't take things on faith, so why should we?

0:24:04 > 0:24:08Why is it that we've not seen any treatments so far?

0:24:08 > 0:24:12Because the genetics turned out to be a great deal more complicated

0:24:12 > 0:24:16than the simple-minded molecular geneticists thought at the beginning,

0:24:16 > 0:24:20because you cannot read off the whole of human life

0:24:20 > 0:24:21from 20,000 genes.

0:24:21 > 0:24:24After all, we're 98% identical genetically,

0:24:24 > 0:24:26in terms of genes, to chimpanzees,

0:24:26 > 0:24:29and no-one would mistake either you or I for a chimpanzee

0:24:29 > 0:24:32and so for any one human characteristic,

0:24:32 > 0:24:35there may be tens, hundreds, thousands of genes involved

0:24:35 > 0:24:39and if you are trying to get cures for diseases,

0:24:39 > 0:24:43the idea that you can get one gene which will solve everything is clearly wrong.

0:24:47 > 0:24:50We've discovered that the links between human genetics

0:24:50 > 0:24:54and disease are far more subtle, far more complex,

0:24:54 > 0:24:58than perhaps people realised amid the hubris of the human genome launch.

0:24:58 > 0:25:03So how do we steer this juggernaut that the Human Genome Project has created

0:25:03 > 0:25:06and can we ever hope to turn all that data

0:25:06 > 0:25:08into useful medical knowledge?

0:25:08 > 0:25:11In 2010, the Wellcome Trust announced new plans

0:25:11 > 0:25:14to sequence even more genomes -

0:25:14 > 0:25:1810,000 over three years - in the hope of delivering new therapies.

0:25:20 > 0:25:23Mike, the Human Genome Project was completed more than a decade ago.

0:25:23 > 0:25:26Why do you create ever more sequences?

0:25:26 > 0:25:29What we got in the year 2000 was what we call

0:25:29 > 0:25:32the reference human genome. So it's like an average human genome.

0:25:32 > 0:25:35One of the most important things to study is,

0:25:35 > 0:25:39what are the differences between individual human genomes?

0:25:39 > 0:25:43And so by sequencing the genomes of many tens,

0:25:43 > 0:25:47hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands of individuals,

0:25:47 > 0:25:51we'll find out all those differences between individual human beings.

0:25:51 > 0:25:56The hope is that these differences can be linked to disease,

0:25:56 > 0:26:00then perhaps new strategies will be found to treat, even cure,

0:26:00 > 0:26:04some of the most common and life-threatening human diseases.

0:26:04 > 0:26:05Give me some numbers.

0:26:05 > 0:26:10What kind of timescales are we talking about for these treatments and medicines?

0:26:10 > 0:26:15It's going to be happening drip, drip, every day, every year,

0:26:15 > 0:26:17for the next several decades.

0:26:18 > 0:26:22So today's message is far more measured than the fanfare

0:26:22 > 0:26:24that rang out back in 2000.

0:26:24 > 0:26:28Who was to blame for all of the hype, all the expectation we got?

0:26:28 > 0:26:31The responsibility has to be divided between the scientists

0:26:31 > 0:26:34who sold the project at the beginning,

0:26:34 > 0:26:38the big pharmaceutical companies and industrialists

0:26:38 > 0:26:40who saw there was a bonanza to be made from patenting genes,

0:26:40 > 0:26:42and the selling to the politicians -

0:26:42 > 0:26:47it was described as equivalent to putting a man on the moon

0:26:47 > 0:26:51or even the equivalent of the discovery of the wheel.

0:26:51 > 0:26:57These grandiose words simply were not justified by what came out.

0:26:59 > 0:27:01And as for one of those involved,

0:27:01 > 0:27:05John Sulston recalls being at Number 10 Downing Street,

0:27:05 > 0:27:08preparing to announce the first draft of the Human Genome.

0:27:08 > 0:27:11I was sitting there next to Max Perutz and Fred Sanger

0:27:11 > 0:27:14and one of them turned to me and said,

0:27:14 > 0:27:17"John, why did you publish now when it's not finished?"

0:27:17 > 0:27:21I said, "I'm sorry. This is not about science, it's about politics."

0:27:24 > 0:27:27Perhaps the most important lesson of the past decade

0:27:27 > 0:27:31has been to show us that, when it comes to investing in science,

0:27:31 > 0:27:34members of the public and politicians should think more long-term.

0:27:34 > 0:27:37It's something we're not used to doing.

0:27:37 > 0:27:42Back in 2000, it seemed as if we were writing the concluding chapter of biology.

0:27:42 > 0:27:44Now it seems that was just the beginning.

0:27:54 > 0:27:56Alok...

0:27:56 > 0:27:57APPLAUSE

0:27:57 > 0:28:01Could I just accuse you of impatience in this situation?

0:28:01 > 0:28:05- Are we just being too quick to judge?- Absolutely. Let's be honest,

0:28:05 > 0:28:07yes, we are being too quick to judge

0:28:07 > 0:28:10but the whole point of the genome project was that it was going

0:28:10 > 0:28:13to give us these things immediately. That's what they said to us.

0:28:13 > 0:28:16That's exactly what John Sulston kind of admitted to saying.

0:28:16 > 0:28:19They did what they had to do. They had to say these things to get that much money

0:28:19 > 0:28:22to allow these things to happen because it was a massive project.

0:28:22 > 0:28:24See it like an infrastructure project.

0:28:24 > 0:28:29You just have to do it, you have to build roads for everyone to drive down,

0:28:29 > 0:28:31you had to do this for the next generation of biology to happen.

0:28:31 > 0:28:34You can't explain it to politicians in two minutes, unfortunately.

0:28:34 > 0:28:38Shall we all just be slightly embarrassed about the claims that were made,

0:28:38 > 0:28:43but glad they basically bluffed the politicians into paying for it?

0:28:43 > 0:28:47Probably, yes. These guys are much cleverer than us, let's be honest.

0:28:47 > 0:28:48They knew what they were doing

0:28:48 > 0:28:53and let's just thank the Lord that they actually were able to understand

0:28:53 > 0:28:55the politics to get this stuff done,

0:28:55 > 0:28:57otherwise they would never have done it

0:28:57 > 0:29:00and, actually, other people, private sector, would have done it

0:29:00 > 0:29:03and we'd be in a very different place now

0:29:03 > 0:29:06because the genome would have been patented, it would have been hard to use,

0:29:06 > 0:29:08genetic medicine would have been even further away.

0:29:08 > 0:29:11I think, first of all, it was a remarkable scientific breakthrough.

0:29:11 > 0:29:14Secondly, it was an astonishing technological breakthrough.

0:29:14 > 0:29:17The technology now is simply breathtaking, it's unthinkable what

0:29:17 > 0:29:22we can do now that we couldn't three years ago so it's quite remarkable.

0:29:22 > 0:29:25Let's also remember it's been very important to some people.

0:29:25 > 0:29:30The place where it's been genuinely important is in cancer studies

0:29:30 > 0:29:33because it turns out that some, but not all cancers,

0:29:33 > 0:29:35have a strong inherited component.

0:29:35 > 0:29:38And there's one particular kind of colon cancer

0:29:38 > 0:29:41which, until a few years ago, five, six years ago,

0:29:41 > 0:29:45the only way you could pick up whether somebody was at risk of inheriting the gene

0:29:45 > 0:29:48which caused it, whether they had it or not,

0:29:48 > 0:29:51was whether they had any signs of the cancer, by which time it was probably too late

0:29:51 > 0:29:54to do much about it. Now you can look straight at the DNA and say

0:29:54 > 0:29:58you inherited this damaging variant or you didn't.

0:29:58 > 0:30:00And you can start treatment straight away.

0:30:00 > 0:30:03There's a lot to keep across here and if you want to know more

0:30:03 > 0:30:07or get involved with the show, this is how you do it.

0:30:07 > 0:30:09You can find us at...

0:30:12 > 0:30:15Or follow us on Twitter.

0:30:15 > 0:30:17Or join the conversation.

0:30:19 > 0:30:23Still to come - comedian Ed Byrne looks into his murky gene pool

0:30:23 > 0:30:26and neuro-scientist Tali Sharot

0:30:26 > 0:30:28reveals the latest startling genetic discoveries.

0:30:33 > 0:30:35With all this talk of DNA,

0:30:35 > 0:30:37we shouldn't act like it's a mysterious thing.

0:30:37 > 0:30:41You can actually see the stuff. You can see some of your own DNA.

0:30:41 > 0:30:43All our cells contain DNA but what you might not know is

0:30:43 > 0:30:47you can extract it, should you want to, using simple household ingredients,

0:30:47 > 0:30:49assuming your house has a ready supply of super strength vodka.

0:30:49 > 0:30:53- What percentage is this, Mark? - 88%.- 88%. OK.

0:30:53 > 0:30:55What's the recipe? How do we do this?

0:30:55 > 0:30:58We need to make a cocktail and we'll try to get this DNA

0:30:58 > 0:31:01that's in every one of our cells out so we can see it.

0:31:01 > 0:31:05First thing to do is collect the cells

0:31:05 > 0:31:08and we thought we'd have a couple of volunteers and try

0:31:08 > 0:31:12and get people's cheek cells into a solution of their saliva.

0:31:12 > 0:31:15We don't want you to bite off the inside of your cheek,

0:31:15 > 0:31:18just rub it with your teeth. Two here, two there.

0:31:18 > 0:31:22Essentially, chew the inside of your mouth and then spit into that.

0:31:22 > 0:31:25What we're trying to do is get the dead cheek cells

0:31:25 > 0:31:28from inside your mouth into your saliva and make a cocktail out of your saliva.

0:31:28 > 0:31:32I think that's probably enough. In you go.

0:31:32 > 0:31:36OK, grand. Temptation is obviously to judge these by how murky they are.

0:31:36 > 0:31:41- Actually... I'm sorry!- Look at the difference!- I know, I know.

0:31:41 > 0:31:46That is insane. That one actually is filthy!

0:31:46 > 0:31:49That is... Yeah, can we exclude that on the grounds...?

0:31:49 > 0:31:54- We may need to redo this experiment. - Yeah, that's just bits in that!

0:31:54 > 0:31:57Moving one of them, I am not saying who it is. It was him!

0:31:57 > 0:32:02Bung them all in together so that we're not revealing any information.

0:32:02 > 0:32:07- For anonymity reasons. - No-one will be cloned from this.

0:32:07 > 0:32:11Mixture of cells. There's a membrane on the outside.

0:32:11 > 0:32:15- We need to get through that.- What's it made of?- Lipids, these are fats.

0:32:15 > 0:32:20We need to get through the fats and to the cytoplasm, need to swim

0:32:20 > 0:32:23through the cytoplasm, hit the nucleus, we need to drag the DNA out.

0:32:23 > 0:32:27This is an enormously complicated thing to be doing. How do we get through the fats, firstly?

0:32:27 > 0:32:30We do something quite simple, which is add

0:32:30 > 0:32:33detergent, which you all know will nicely mop up fat.

0:32:33 > 0:32:37- This is just common garden detergent. Whack it in there.- Washing-up liquid.

0:32:37 > 0:32:40Hopefully we're tunnelling through some membranes.

0:32:40 > 0:32:43- This is just pineapple juice. - What's in pineapple juice?

0:32:43 > 0:32:47It's got this protease cold bromelain and it's amazing stuff.

0:32:47 > 0:32:49It's used to tenderise meat

0:32:49 > 0:32:52and if you put it on meat, it will essentially dissolve it, almost.

0:32:52 > 0:32:55We just need to mash this up, there we go.

0:32:55 > 0:32:58I think you can hear the cells screaming.

0:32:58 > 0:33:02OK, there's too many bubbles and frothy stuff in there,

0:33:02 > 0:33:04so the next thing is to strain it.

0:33:04 > 0:33:07- I'll try to... - You have all the gear, don't you?

0:33:07 > 0:33:11Try this at home with the old vodka martini.

0:33:11 > 0:33:14The cocktail shaker you never use.

0:33:14 > 0:33:17You got it as a wedding present or something.

0:33:17 > 0:33:21OK, there we go. That's quite exciting.

0:33:21 > 0:33:26We're going to get the DNA to come out of the solution by marrying it

0:33:26 > 0:33:30with the alcohol. It's not such strong alcohol

0:33:30 > 0:33:34that it doesn't dissolve... The DNA doesn't dissolve as strongly

0:33:34 > 0:33:37and so it will precipitate out.

0:33:37 > 0:33:42- What percentage is that? - It's 88%.- Go on.- Yeah, go on!

0:33:43 > 0:33:47- That's probably enough.- Polish vodka?

0:33:47 > 0:33:49- While you're doing that... - Generations of Poles.

0:33:49 > 0:33:51We know how to drink that stuff.

0:33:51 > 0:33:54LAUGHTER

0:33:54 > 0:33:56- DARA GASPS - Oh, Jesus!

0:33:56 > 0:33:58LAUGHTER

0:33:58 > 0:34:00This was the real experiment, by the way.

0:34:03 > 0:34:06It was worth it just for that.

0:34:06 > 0:34:08- Oh, oh!- Down there, there.

0:34:08 > 0:34:13Why is that your national drink? That is horrible! Oh, God! Wow!

0:34:13 > 0:34:16- Bits of my throat and everything. - DNA?

0:34:16 > 0:34:19I would say. Blood, actually!

0:34:19 > 0:34:25We're going to get a layer of alcohol that will sit on top of the solution.

0:34:25 > 0:34:30And when the DNA molecules hit that layer,

0:34:30 > 0:34:36they can't dissolve as well in that and so they come out of solution.

0:34:36 > 0:34:38They rise out of...

0:34:38 > 0:34:41They hit it, it's a bit like sugar in tea,

0:34:41 > 0:34:43when you cool it down it's not as soluble.

0:34:43 > 0:34:47You can see it. There's a cloud of DNA.

0:34:47 > 0:34:51- That is really, really good.- That's the joint DNA of the three of you.

0:34:51 > 0:34:55Have we a shot that we can get from here? Because that's amazing.

0:34:55 > 0:34:58It's really, really clear. John, can you come in here?

0:35:00 > 0:35:06Now, that is very clearly... That's like a little web of DNA.

0:35:06 > 0:35:09You should all be very proud of the strength and health.

0:35:09 > 0:35:12- Now we can gather it up. There we go.- Wow.

0:35:12 > 0:35:18That, although it looks very unimpressive, that goo,

0:35:18 > 0:35:22that is the genius that is life.

0:35:22 > 0:35:24Lovely stuff, well done, that's impressive.

0:35:24 > 0:35:27Ladies and gentlemen, give it up for Mark. Thank you very much.

0:35:27 > 0:35:28Well done, Mark.

0:35:32 > 0:35:33Yes, extract your DNA

0:35:33 > 0:35:35and you could become one of the most famous names in science.

0:35:35 > 0:35:37We've all heard the famous names in science

0:35:37 > 0:35:39but there are many scientists that have been doing amazing work

0:35:39 > 0:35:41and you've never heard their names.

0:35:41 > 0:35:44This is why we've instigated our hall of fame.

0:35:44 > 0:35:45Obviously headed by the big five.

0:35:45 > 0:35:47Darwin, Einstein, Newton, all that.

0:35:47 > 0:35:51Who do you think has been overlooked?

0:35:51 > 0:35:56Someone who has been overlooked is the guy who founded genetics

0:35:56 > 0:35:58is this chap here.

0:35:58 > 0:36:02He's called Francis Galton. He was this chap's cousin.

0:36:02 > 0:36:05They were both pretty smart. He did many extraordinary things.

0:36:05 > 0:36:09He was interested in human quality, which he measured in different ways.

0:36:09 > 0:36:14He measured height, weight, looked at their parents. He did a lot...

0:36:14 > 0:36:16More or less founded statistics.

0:36:16 > 0:36:21He's the only person who has made a beauty map of the British Isles

0:36:21 > 0:36:24and he went from city to city scoring the local

0:36:24 > 0:36:28females on a five-point scale from attractive to repulsive.

0:36:28 > 0:36:30The low point was in Aberdeen.

0:36:30 > 0:36:33I once said that in Aberdeen - that was a mistake.

0:36:33 > 0:36:35I had one.

0:36:35 > 0:36:41Lazzaro Spallanzani. This man was knitting tiny trousers for frogs.

0:36:41 > 0:36:46He's a good scientist. He should be here. I always put mine

0:36:46 > 0:36:50over here cos he'll be remembered for the wrong things.

0:36:50 > 0:36:53He'll always exist slightly sideways.

0:36:53 > 0:36:56It was a big deal when we had our GMC quiz but recently,

0:36:56 > 0:36:59our heavy-browed, knuckle-dragging evolutionary cousins

0:36:59 > 0:37:02the Neanderthals have also had their genomes decoded.

0:37:02 > 0:37:06It's thrown up some fascinating facts as Ed Byrne is finding out.

0:37:08 > 0:37:11I'm on my way to the world-famous Natural History Museum.

0:37:16 > 0:37:22Meet Chris Stringer, Britain's foremost expert on human origins.

0:37:22 > 0:37:25Are we related to or descended from Neanderthals?

0:37:25 > 0:37:3050 years ago, the opinion was we descended from them but with the new

0:37:30 > 0:37:35evidence, the idea now is that we're two branches of the evolutionary tree.

0:37:35 > 0:37:41So there was a split between homo sapiens and Neanderthal.

0:37:41 > 0:37:42About half a million years ago,

0:37:42 > 0:37:45there was a species called Homo heidelbergensis

0:37:45 > 0:37:49and they went in different directions.

0:37:49 > 0:37:53North of the Mediterranean, it became the Neanderthals

0:37:53 > 0:37:57and south of the Mediterranean, it became us - Homo sapiens.

0:38:00 > 0:38:03Why Homo sapiens flourished

0:38:03 > 0:38:06when our Neanderthal cousins didn't is a bit of a mystery.

0:38:06 > 0:38:11What's even more of a mystery is how it is that, despite them

0:38:11 > 0:38:16being two different species, there was some interbreeding.

0:38:16 > 0:38:18Some experts have always thought there was a bit of interbreeding.

0:38:18 > 0:38:23People like me regard the Neanderthal as being a different species.

0:38:23 > 0:38:29We know closely-related mammals can interbreed so lions and tigers,

0:38:29 > 0:38:30African and Indian elephants.

0:38:30 > 0:38:32There probably was a bit of interbreeding

0:38:32 > 0:38:36when modern humans came out of Africa and the early DNA work on Neanderthals,

0:38:36 > 0:38:40getting DNA from bones also supported that view.

0:38:40 > 0:38:42In the last couple of years,

0:38:42 > 0:38:48the latest DNA work shows that you and I have got some Neanderthal in us.

0:38:51 > 0:38:53I take a liberal attitude to these things

0:38:53 > 0:38:57but I'm feeling...don't fancy yours much.

0:38:57 > 0:38:59If you know what I mean.

0:38:59 > 0:39:03I don't mean to disrespect here, but would our breeding with

0:39:03 > 0:39:08the Neanderthal coincide with the invention of alcohol?

0:39:08 > 0:39:10No evidence of booze back there.

0:39:10 > 0:39:14- It could have been magic mushrooms maybe.- That would do it.

0:39:14 > 0:39:17How the interbreeding happened, we don't yet know.

0:39:17 > 0:39:22On one extreme, it's the desperation scenario so modern humans ran

0:39:22 > 0:39:27out of mates and they captured some from a Neanderthal group.

0:39:27 > 0:39:29In a sort of Annie Hall as a goal spirit.

0:39:29 > 0:39:33Maybe they had a big love-in.

0:39:33 > 0:39:35I tend to think that's less likely.

0:39:35 > 0:39:38I love the idea that there could have been one massive

0:39:38 > 0:39:43love-in between the Neanderthals and humans.

0:39:43 > 0:39:46Can you tell how Neanderthal someone is by looking at them?

0:39:46 > 0:39:49Are there physical traits that signify Neanderthal?

0:39:49 > 0:39:54Big brow ridges, big nose ridges. Not much of a chin.

0:39:54 > 0:39:59You can look around and say, those people look a bit more Neanderthal.

0:39:59 > 0:40:02The upper classes, they haven't got the chin going on.

0:40:02 > 0:40:04Is there more Neanderthal there?

0:40:04 > 0:40:06But just looking at people, we can't tell that now.

0:40:06 > 0:40:11We'd have to look at their DNA. To tell how much Neanderthal they are.

0:40:13 > 0:40:17There's actually a cool website here that tests your DNA to find

0:40:17 > 0:40:21out exactly what percentage of you is Neanderthal

0:40:21 > 0:40:25because as Chris was saying, the physical characteristics like broad

0:40:25 > 0:40:31shoulders or a sloping forehead don't indicate how Neanderthal you are.

0:40:31 > 0:40:35Just cos he looks like one, doesn't mean Dara is a Neanderthal.

0:40:35 > 0:40:37There, I said it. It was out there. I said it.

0:40:37 > 0:40:40I've got their testing kit here.

0:40:40 > 0:40:45I was apprehensive about giving a sample of genetic

0:40:45 > 0:40:51material on camera, but apparently saliva will suffice.

0:40:51 > 0:40:54So...

0:40:54 > 0:40:57Actually spitting camera is also a bit gross.

0:40:57 > 0:40:59Maybe we should cut three.

0:41:07 > 0:41:11Professor Mark Thomas is an evolutionary geneticist from UCM.

0:41:11 > 0:41:15He specialises in looking into our ancient DNA.

0:41:15 > 0:41:20Have you seen this? It's an app. It turns you into a Neanderthal.

0:41:20 > 0:41:23Right. Go on, do it.

0:41:28 > 0:41:29HE LAUGHS

0:41:29 > 0:41:32- It's an improvement.- Not bad. You should consider a beard.

0:41:32 > 0:41:34Yeah.

0:41:35 > 0:41:38Some say Neanderthals were a different species.

0:41:38 > 0:41:41Inter-species breeding is quite a rare thing.

0:41:41 > 0:41:45Particularly to happen on the scale we're talking about.

0:41:45 > 0:41:47How would that have come about?

0:41:47 > 0:41:51The problem here is what do we mean by species.

0:41:51 > 0:41:53Some people define it as you're a different species

0:41:53 > 0:41:55if you can't interbreed.

0:41:55 > 0:41:59Clearly we're not a different species from Neanderthals cos we did.

0:41:59 > 0:42:01That shouldn't surprise us cos we only

0:42:01 > 0:42:08separated from Neanderthals as a species about 300-400,000 years ago.

0:42:08 > 0:42:10That's a blip in evolutionary terms

0:42:10 > 0:42:13so we shouldn't be that different anyway.

0:42:13 > 0:42:17There we have it. Despite our obvious differences.

0:42:17 > 0:42:20We, homo sapiens, used to get it on with Neanderthals.

0:42:20 > 0:42:23Although bit like a one-night stand. The details are hazy.

0:42:23 > 0:42:24We're not sure how it happened,

0:42:24 > 0:42:27when it happened or indeed who instigated it.

0:42:27 > 0:42:31One thing I do know, if you've ever used the term Neanderthal to

0:42:31 > 0:42:34describe someone who's a bit stupid, I for one am insulted.

0:42:34 > 0:42:37That's my relative you're talking about so I take great offence.

0:42:37 > 0:42:40I'm not sure how much offence I should take

0:42:40 > 0:42:42until I see the results of the DNA test.

0:42:42 > 0:42:46APPLAUSE

0:42:46 > 0:42:49Ladies and gentlemen, Ed Byrne.

0:42:58 > 0:42:59Did you learn anything on that?

0:42:59 > 0:43:02I learned that no-one can agree on anything.

0:43:02 > 0:43:05That's the fun part about science.

0:43:05 > 0:43:09They can always be relied upon for a good dust-up between scientists.

0:43:09 > 0:43:12How it came about that we ended up mating with Neanderthals

0:43:12 > 0:43:17whether it was homo sapiens that did it out of necessity or

0:43:17 > 0:43:23Neanderthals that did it to us out of superior strength is unknown.

0:43:23 > 0:43:27It's jarring for people to think that they evolved in Europe

0:43:27 > 0:43:30while we were evolving in Africa.

0:43:30 > 0:43:34The odd thing about humans nowadays is that there's just us.

0:43:34 > 0:43:38The species to which most of us claim to belong which is homo sapien.

0:43:38 > 0:43:41It might be that the Neanderthals who had been in Europe for a long

0:43:41 > 0:43:44time while we were evolving in Africa, we drove them out.

0:43:44 > 0:43:47Because we're smart nasty and unpleasant.

0:43:47 > 0:43:51There was a time before driving them out that we got kissy with them.

0:43:51 > 0:43:57We gave you a test to see what percentage of Neanderthal you had.

0:43:57 > 0:44:01Before you open that, can we introduce some competition here?

0:44:01 > 0:44:02What percentage of Neanderthal...?

0:44:02 > 0:44:07That's what we're asking cos they also did me.

0:44:07 > 0:44:13We should not invest any significance in these figures.

0:44:13 > 0:44:19I am not more stooped or powerful or have a larger brain.

0:44:19 > 0:44:22- There's an easy way to find out.- Yes. We just wrestle, you mean?

0:44:22 > 0:44:24This is how you want this to end?

0:44:24 > 0:44:29- Ed, firstly, what percentage of you is Neanderthal?- I am 3.2%.

0:44:29 > 0:44:34- That strikes me as quite high. - That is quite high.- Excuse me.

0:44:34 > 0:44:42Well, well, well. You mixed, didn't you? Whereas I am 3.0%.

0:44:42 > 0:44:48That could be why I prefer decorating my house with

0:44:48 > 0:44:50animal bones more than you do.

0:44:50 > 0:44:54I do. That's why you will die out earlier.

0:44:55 > 0:45:00That app is great. Yvette first as a Neanderthal.

0:45:01 > 0:45:04That's ED I presume.

0:45:05 > 0:45:09Grand. And me, although this I am clearly less.

0:45:09 > 0:45:12I get the way it works.

0:45:12 > 0:45:15It's a picture of your eyes on the same Neanderthal.

0:45:15 > 0:45:19What 69p did we waste on that?

0:45:20 > 0:45:23In 2003, when the human genome was decoded,

0:45:23 > 0:45:26we decided we had 22-23,000 genes.

0:45:26 > 0:45:29This was about the same number of genes as a mouse.

0:45:29 > 0:45:33For such a complex organism as us, it was disappointingly few.

0:45:33 > 0:45:37We had massively underestimated how complex genetic expression is.

0:45:37 > 0:45:40A rethink was needed and that rethink led us

0:45:40 > 0:45:42into the world of the epigenome.

0:45:42 > 0:45:45We sent Tali Sharot to find out more.

0:45:52 > 0:45:56These mice are famous in the world of epigenetics. They're called the agouti mice

0:45:56 > 0:46:02because they have the agouti gene which makes them yellow and very fat.

0:46:02 > 0:46:05They're identical in terms of the genes and as you expect,

0:46:05 > 0:46:09they look exactly the same.

0:46:09 > 0:46:15This one looks very different.

0:46:15 > 0:46:18It's brown, it's leaner and it's much healthier,

0:46:18 > 0:46:22but it too is genetically identical to the other ones.

0:46:22 > 0:46:26It has the agouti gene.

0:46:26 > 0:46:29What's different is that it has a chemical tap on top of that

0:46:29 > 0:46:32gene which suppresses it.

0:46:32 > 0:46:35That is epigenetics at work.

0:46:37 > 0:46:41We used to have a very simple model of genetic expression.

0:46:41 > 0:46:43These mice are changing that.

0:46:43 > 0:46:50They clearly show that one gene can be expressed to two quite different ways.

0:46:50 > 0:46:53And as we're discovering, it's the epigenome that's

0:46:53 > 0:46:56instrumental in mediating that expression.

0:46:56 > 0:46:59This is a molecule of DNA.

0:46:59 > 0:47:04The epigenetic markers sit here, on top of one of the base pairs.

0:47:04 > 0:47:09What they are is a cluster of carbon and hydrogen atoms.

0:47:09 > 0:47:13They don't change the underlying gene.

0:47:13 > 0:47:16What they do is they suppress the gene expression.

0:47:17 > 0:47:23You can think of the epigenome as software to the hardware of the DNA.

0:47:23 > 0:47:25Now, what's really interesting is that,

0:47:25 > 0:47:27unlike the DNA, which remain stable,

0:47:27 > 0:47:31the epigenome is something that we can actually manipulate and control.

0:47:38 > 0:47:40Dana Dolinoy is an epigeneticist

0:47:40 > 0:47:44at the University of Michigan School of Public Health.

0:47:44 > 0:47:46She's been changing the epigenetic markers

0:47:46 > 0:47:49on the agouti mouse genome.

0:47:49 > 0:47:53She does this by adding chemicals to the diet of the pregnant mothers

0:47:53 > 0:47:56because the epigenome is most vulnerable to change

0:47:56 > 0:47:59during development in the womb.

0:47:59 > 0:48:01When we did this experiment,

0:48:01 > 0:48:03we noticed there were a lot more yellow obese offspring.

0:48:03 > 0:48:06So by introducing the chemical to the diet of the mother,

0:48:06 > 0:48:09you were changing the epigenome of her offspring?

0:48:09 > 0:48:10Exactly.

0:48:10 > 0:48:14And it turns a gene on when it normally should be off

0:48:14 > 0:48:16and it caused these mice to eat and become obese.

0:48:18 > 0:48:21Once they figured out how to make the offspring fat,

0:48:21 > 0:48:24they repeated the experiment with a second pregnancy

0:48:24 > 0:48:27to see if they could make the new babies healthy.

0:48:27 > 0:48:30They found out they could.

0:48:30 > 0:48:32And this time we supplemented their diet

0:48:32 > 0:48:35with a whole lot of nutritional factors like folic acid

0:48:35 > 0:48:37so we showed by nutritional supplementation

0:48:37 > 0:48:40we could counteract the effect of that chemical alone.

0:48:40 > 0:48:42And that was truly amazing.

0:48:44 > 0:48:49This time, the mother was able to produce lean brown mice pups,

0:48:49 > 0:48:52all because nutrition had altered their epigenome.

0:48:52 > 0:48:56It's an astonishing proof that environmental epigenetic changes

0:48:56 > 0:48:59can override what's written in their DNA.

0:49:01 > 0:49:04The big question is, could it be the same for humans?

0:49:04 > 0:49:07Can we manipulate our own epigenome?

0:49:09 > 0:49:14Here in Sweden, scientists are trying to find out by doing just that.

0:49:14 > 0:49:17We used to think that our epigenome is set at birth,

0:49:17 > 0:49:20but new research in humans now shows that, actually,

0:49:20 > 0:49:24it can change throughout our life. That's really interesting

0:49:24 > 0:49:28because it suggests we have much more control over our genetic destiny.

0:49:31 > 0:49:34Many diseases, like cancer, type 2 diabetes

0:49:34 > 0:49:38and cardiovascular disease, are thought to involve the epigenome,

0:49:38 > 0:49:42with epigenetic markers altering the expression of our DNA.

0:49:42 > 0:49:44If these markers are flexible,

0:49:44 > 0:49:48this has huge implications for our future health.

0:49:52 > 0:49:57Juleen Zierath studies diabetes at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm.

0:49:57 > 0:50:00She's been trying to find out

0:50:00 > 0:50:04if exercise changes the epigenetic markers on our muscle tissue.

0:50:04 > 0:50:06All right, so that's your first stage.

0:50:07 > 0:50:11And her team have uncovered some surprising results.

0:50:11 > 0:50:14This picture on top represents

0:50:14 > 0:50:17a schematic diagram of a gene

0:50:17 > 0:50:20that's really important for burning fat in muscle.

0:50:20 > 0:50:23And this is before exercise.

0:50:23 > 0:50:26And you can see that after exercise

0:50:26 > 0:50:28the hill is smaller,

0:50:28 > 0:50:29so that would suggest

0:50:29 > 0:50:33that there is a disappearance of methyl groups from the DNA.

0:50:33 > 0:50:36So these are changes to the epigenome that we're seeing here?

0:50:36 > 0:50:39- And all these changes are positive in this case?- That's correct.

0:50:39 > 0:50:43We didn't imagine that we would be able to see these kinds of changes

0:50:43 > 0:50:45in response to exercise.

0:50:45 > 0:50:47After intense exercise,

0:50:47 > 0:50:49the epigenetic methyl tags disappeared from the DNA,

0:50:49 > 0:50:51making the tissue healthier,

0:50:51 > 0:50:54better at metabolising glucose and burning fat.

0:50:54 > 0:50:56This change was completely unexpected.

0:50:56 > 0:50:57We thought that this was fixed.

0:50:57 > 0:51:01What this would suggest is that the epigenome is more flexible

0:51:01 > 0:51:05than we could have imagined, so this was really surprising to us.

0:51:05 > 0:51:08So a simple workout, a 20-minute workout,

0:51:08 > 0:51:10can change our epigenome.

0:51:10 > 0:51:14We used to think that if you were predisposed to a disease,

0:51:14 > 0:51:17you couldn't do much about it.

0:51:17 > 0:51:20Juleen's results suggest we may have more control

0:51:20 > 0:51:24over our future health than we thought possible.

0:51:24 > 0:51:26This is a whole new frontier of medicine.

0:51:26 > 0:51:28Based on the studies,

0:51:28 > 0:51:32something like exercise can reprogram the muscle to be more fit,

0:51:32 > 0:51:38and to increase its capacity to burn fuels like glucose and fats...

0:51:39 > 0:51:42..and possibly even prevent the development of type 2 diabetes,

0:51:42 > 0:51:45because we can keep our sugar levels under control.

0:51:50 > 0:51:55Until recently, we believed that genetics alone determined our inheritance.

0:51:55 > 0:51:58But we now know that's not the case.

0:51:58 > 0:52:02Far from being fixed at the moment of conception,

0:52:02 > 0:52:05these new insights into our dynamic epigenome

0:52:05 > 0:52:08suggest we may actually be able to take control

0:52:08 > 0:52:13of our own genetic destinies is ways that we never imagined.

0:52:17 > 0:52:21Tali, thank you very much for coming in. This is a big deal.

0:52:21 > 0:52:23This is a major change, isn't it?

0:52:23 > 0:52:27Yeah, it seems that things like nutrition and exercise

0:52:27 > 0:52:30and all kinds of environmental factors

0:52:30 > 0:52:31will change the epigenome,

0:52:31 > 0:52:34and the epigenome changes the expression of the gene.

0:52:34 > 0:52:40And the epigenome is a switch that sits on top of the base-pairs on the DNA

0:52:40 > 0:52:42- and can either be functioning or not functioning?- Yeah.

0:52:42 > 0:52:47And what it does, it can switch off the expression of the gene

0:52:47 > 0:52:50and therefore totally change traits, like we saw with the agouti mice.

0:52:50 > 0:52:56Yes, and we also saw the man on the bike was switching on or switching off...

0:52:56 > 0:53:00was switching off certain genes because of the exercise he was doing at the time.

0:53:00 > 0:53:02Yeah. So that's really interesting,

0:53:02 > 0:53:05cos what happens there is that the epigenome is changing

0:53:05 > 0:53:07for a very short amount of time.

0:53:07 > 0:53:10So you exercise and the change only lasts for about an hour,

0:53:10 > 0:53:12so it's acute.

0:53:12 > 0:53:13And that's quite interesting.

0:53:13 > 0:53:14The only thing about it is,

0:53:14 > 0:53:18- we don't know whether it's a good effect or a bad effect? - In the case of exercise,

0:53:18 > 0:53:20it seems like it was a positive effect,

0:53:20 > 0:53:22cos it enhances metabolism, and that's good.

0:53:22 > 0:53:26But we do know that... For example, in a famous study in Sweden,

0:53:26 > 0:53:31they looked at a village - Overkalix - and they showed that

0:53:31 > 0:53:33whether the grandparents had a lot to eat,

0:53:33 > 0:53:35whether it was a good time for them,

0:53:35 > 0:53:39or whether they were in famine, where they didn't have much to eat,

0:53:39 > 0:53:42actually it affected two generations later

0:53:42 > 0:53:44the longevity of their grandchildren.

0:53:44 > 0:53:48- You pick an obscure Swedish village... We have shots of it.- Yeah, that's it.

0:53:48 > 0:53:50..which is isolated, but well recorded,

0:53:50 > 0:53:53and then you contract the relative health.

0:53:53 > 0:53:55But two generations later?

0:53:55 > 0:53:59- Possibly more. At least two now. - Yeah. They looked at two, but...

0:53:59 > 0:54:02What's astonishing, genuinely astonishing, about the Swedish study

0:54:02 > 0:54:04is it goes down through males.

0:54:04 > 0:54:07So it's actually changing the DNA in the sperm.

0:54:07 > 0:54:12- It's nothing to do with the woman's body. It's actually the DNA. - So I think there's two points here.

0:54:12 > 0:54:15One is we can change our epigenome throughout our lifetime,

0:54:15 > 0:54:20and the second is that changes to our epigenome can actually be inherited

0:54:20 > 0:54:23and not only inherited by our kids but a second generation over.

0:54:23 > 0:54:26It means we have a lot of responsibility.

0:54:26 > 0:54:30So if I start smoking and drinking or not eating well,

0:54:30 > 0:54:33it's not only going to affect me, it's going to affect my kids,

0:54:33 > 0:54:36- possibly my grandkids, and so on and so on and so on. - The guy on the bike, by the way,

0:54:36 > 0:54:40if the guy on the bike wanted to pass on those changes to the next generation,

0:54:40 > 0:54:44would he have had to make a baby, basically,

0:54:44 > 0:54:47an hour after he'd been on the exercise bike?

0:54:47 > 0:54:52- Is that how long...?- On the bike. - On the bike is great. Fantastic.

0:54:52 > 0:54:56I don't think we know and I don't think the experiment has been done...

0:54:56 > 0:54:58Yes. You'd get funding for that!

0:54:58 > 0:55:03We've talked about everything we wanted to know about sex but were afraid to ask.

0:55:03 > 0:55:06If you have any other questions you want to add to this about genetics,

0:55:06 > 0:55:09we have our after-hours science club which is starting now,

0:55:09 > 0:55:12where Steve Jones will be waiting for your questions.

0:55:12 > 0:55:15If you want to get involved with the show, this is how you do it.

0:55:20 > 0:55:22APPLAUSE

0:55:22 > 0:55:25Some last items of business, then. How attractive is this crowd?

0:55:25 > 0:55:27Let's have a look.

0:55:27 > 0:55:29We've been staring at you all day,

0:55:29 > 0:55:32but let's have a look at the average of this.

0:55:32 > 0:55:33The gist of this, basically,

0:55:33 > 0:55:37the scientific principle was, we tend to favour more symmetric faces

0:55:37 > 0:55:39because we believe they are healthier

0:55:39 > 0:55:43and there is possibly an argument to say the more symmetric face is genetically stronger,

0:55:43 > 0:55:47having weeded out imperfections and things that cause asymmetry.

0:55:47 > 0:55:51So let's have a look. We've flashed you various faces.

0:55:51 > 0:55:54Those are faces of the studio audience there.

0:55:54 > 0:55:58We've got two composites, obviously, the male and the female composite, which I think we can do.

0:55:58 > 0:56:00Do you have the male composite?

0:56:01 > 0:56:06Not an enormous amount of raw lust coming out of the room at this stage for that.

0:56:06 > 0:56:11- It's Michael McIntyre! - It genuinely is Michael McIntyre.

0:56:11 > 0:56:12Michael McIntyre, it turns out,

0:56:12 > 0:56:16is your image of the ideal beautiful person.

0:56:16 > 0:56:18Let's have a look at the ladies.

0:56:18 > 0:56:21You know, I can't see exactly who that is.

0:56:21 > 0:56:23Let's put them together

0:56:23 > 0:56:27and just see if you think they are more attractive than average.

0:56:27 > 0:56:31Try not to think of Michael McIntyre when you're actually doing the vote.

0:56:31 > 0:56:32More or less attractive than average?

0:56:32 > 0:56:36No-one, no-one? Literally...one guy.

0:56:36 > 0:56:40You don't have to throw in cos I need you to get involved.

0:56:40 > 0:56:43OK, so that piece of science is clearly bunk.

0:56:43 > 0:56:45We're going to lose that.

0:56:45 > 0:56:49Can we bring in the rest of our contributors?

0:56:49 > 0:56:51That's very, very kind. Thank you.

0:56:51 > 0:56:53- By the way, if you average... - ED GROWLS

0:56:53 > 0:56:57- Sit down. Sit down! Sit down, Caveman Ed. - ED GROWLS

0:56:57 > 0:57:01This, by the way, is the average of the presenters.

0:57:01 > 0:57:04LAUGHTER

0:57:05 > 0:57:08- That's actually... - There's a lot of me in there.

0:57:08 > 0:57:10It is predominantly... You can see me!

0:57:10 > 0:57:12That actually isn't bad.

0:57:12 > 0:57:14That actually is better than all of us combined, I think.

0:57:14 > 0:57:17- Apart from the fringe. - At least we've got hair now, Dara.

0:57:17 > 0:57:21I've got hair. You're right! It's me with hair!

0:57:21 > 0:57:22That is just about it for tonight.

0:57:22 > 0:57:25I would like to say thanks to all of our reporters,

0:57:25 > 0:57:27to Alok and Tali. Thanks to Mark Miodownik, of course,

0:57:27 > 0:57:32and to our special guest, Ed Byrne, and a big thanks to tonight's science guru Steve Jones.

0:57:32 > 0:57:34CHEERING

0:57:38 > 0:57:40But more than that, ladies and gentlemen,

0:57:40 > 0:57:43we have to wrap up what we have learned tonight.

0:57:43 > 0:57:45We've learned, many, many things in the Science Club.

0:57:45 > 0:57:47We've discovered genes aren't everything,

0:57:47 > 0:57:50that epigenetics is the emerging big new area of study.

0:57:50 > 0:57:53We've learned scientists make pairs of shorts for frogs,

0:57:53 > 0:57:57that Ed Byrne is more Neanderthal than me - that's quite a nice thing.

0:57:57 > 0:58:03We found out also that if you drink really strong Polish vodka midway through a television show,

0:58:03 > 0:58:05at the end, it still hurts.

0:58:05 > 0:58:08That's something you may not have learned, but take it from me.

0:58:08 > 0:58:11We found that our audience, if you add them all together, are moderately attractive

0:58:11 > 0:58:15but less attractive than anyone in particular, but weirdly they look like Michael McIntyre.

0:58:15 > 0:58:19But mainly we've learnt - if you take any advice at all -

0:58:19 > 0:58:21if you want to make a baby, do it on an exercise bike.

0:58:21 > 0:58:24That's what we've learnt tonight. It's been a pleasure to have you.

0:58:24 > 0:58:27We'll see you for another Science Club soon. Good night.

0:58:49 > 0:58:52Subtitles by Red Bee Media Ltd